User talk:Wetman/archive15Jan2005

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wetman's blunders[edit]

(Help me fill this subsection, would you?)
Blunder 1: setting up a Blunder heading with nothing in it :) - Adrian Pingstone 17:03, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Francis_I,_Holy_Roman_Emperor image confusion[edit]

Can you explain this edit? [1]

I explained in my edit removing the image that it was not of Holy Roman Emperor Francis I, but of his grandson. You then put the image back in. It's only now that some kindly unsigned in user has seen that it's back and removed it again. So why did you put it back there? john k 15:59, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I thought it had been inadvertently deleted, not seeing any mention of a wrong portrait in the article's Discussion page, so I meant to restore the page. Something I've done often for Wikipedia without making a blunder until now. Perhaps you'd be good-hearted enough to make a brief note at the blank Discussion page with the two portraits. Something gently humorous and tolerant, might I suggest? Wetman 23:27, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Sorry for the snappishness. It's just that in my edit summary, I said exactly why I had removed the image...anyway, not terribly important, I just found it a bit annoying. I wrote the note to you in the heat of my irritation. It shouldn't be a problem now, since we have proper images in both articles. john k 07:21, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Well, I must look at the article with their correct portraits to get my own interior images straight. Wetman 07:34, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Major Macedonia blunder[edit]

I thought a link to early history at Macedon had been reverted (this is contentious geography) and fired off this premature salvo:

A link to the early history, which is at Macedon is a perfectly neutral and sensible service to the Wikipedia reader. A further reversion on your part, will be reported as vandalism. --Wetman

First of all, STOP BULLYING ME me and save your threats for someone else. There's the diff between my and your revision. I didn't touch your link to Macedon. My changes are documented in the talk page. Etz Haim 15:37, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

My apologies for my stupid mistake. My concern is only in the useful link. It looked as through it had been deleted. Seemed so pointless. Totally off my mark. My apologies to you. --Wetman 15:44, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I accept your apologies that don't have to be public; I assume good faith in you, that's more than enough. Just if you think something goes the wrong way, don't make your complaints within the edit summary, but please choose a more appropriate place. All the best. Etz Haim 15:51, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Others' gaffes for contrast[edit]

Misdirected rant on fake geographical names (removed from my Userpage, with a long-handled spatula)[edit]

Hi. I noticed you have used a biased and illegal name instead of the name Persian Gulf in your writings.

That despite the fact that the name of that body of water has always been nothing else than Persian Gulf. (See all the historical maps).

And despite the fact that the United Nations on many occasions has requested that only Persian Gulf be used as the standard geographical designation for that body of water. Most recently, the UN secretariat has issued two editorial directives in 1994 and 1999 affirming the position of this organization on this matter.

In the United States, Persian Gulf has been the label sanctioned for U.S. government use since a decision by the State Department's Board of Geographical Names in 1917. This decision is still valid

It is not correct to follow certain biased politically-motivated anti-Persian lobbies in an encyclopaedia and change the established geographical names as it suits you. It will be like me calling England, "Land" or Persialand in this encyclopaedia because I do not like English! --Mani1 00:40, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

(I don't know what this third-world fool is ranting about. I detest all bogus renaming of features based on cheap politics, almost as much as seeing this refuse on my Userpage instead of my Talkpage. I would never refer to the Persian Gulf as the "Arabian Gulf" pressured by a few rich ill-bred aggressive fanatical bullies who demand the falsification of history. --Wetman 00:59, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC))


Hi, I've removed your sentence about radiometric dating from Half-life. IMHO, this technology should be discussed in depth at Radiometric dating or Radioactive decay, and be mentioned briefly at Exponential decay. By rights, it shouldn't appear at all at Half-life, though perhaps some general interpretational note should be made for the benefit of un-mathematical readers who follow a link there. --Smack 17:08, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The H in "IMHO" stands for "humble." The better sort of editors always keep the reader in mind. --Wetman 17:14, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Indeed, they do. Have you anything substantive to say on this question, in addition to that snide remark? --Smack 17:44, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

(Needless to say, I did not, having shot my dart. But, Gentle Reader, just imagine suppressing a reference to radiometric dating in an article on Half-life.)

Unwelcome at Wikipedia[edit]

Recently I had to post the following at the User page of recently-arrived User:CheeseDreams:

"A "Welcome to the Wikipedia" is automatically extended to all new users, of which you are quite a recent arrival. Sometimes the welcome proves to have been premature. Among irritating and irresponsible behavior unwelcome at wikipedia is the practice of liberally pasting NPOV and cleanup labels on articles where others have been laboring to achieve clarity, fairness, historical accuracy and balance, but where one has not actually made any significant contribution oneself. Perhaps you'd be willing to return to the pages you have recently labelled and set to work, keeping an open mind and the interests of the reader in the forefront. Thank you."

A glance at that user's "User contributions" will help the reader to assess whether my note was just or not. We can momentarily expect quite an indignant reply, worthy of this newly-arrived coxcomb. (Edit conflict!) Why, here it is:

Perhaps you would have enough manners to actually wait for more than half an hour before slagging someone off? CheeseDreams 00:15, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Now, have I actually "slagged off" this person? --Wetman 00:24, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Like I said to the magician, "Wow! How did you do that? Could you do it again?" :) ---Rednblu | Talk 01:08, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Was I quick to catch on to that user, eh! Here's more:
In case you're interested, there's an RfC regarding CheeseDreams' recent behavior. --[[User:Eequor|ᓛᖁ♀]] 04:00, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hello, I appreciate your edits to Astor Place, but I wonder if they would be more appropriate for an article on Astor Place itself, instead of its subway station. In that regard, I am going to move your valuable information to an article on Astor Place. Thank you! PZFUN 05:51, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It just seemed as though the urban setting for Astor Place (New York Subway) might be a sensible way to extend such a very brief stub. Context. But with attention spans so short, what could I have been thinking? Wetman 05:58, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I believe you misunderstood me. I do appreciate context, but it just seemed off context. The article was about the subway station located underneath Astor Place, not Astor Place itself. Just like the article about the City Hall station doesn't also include information about New York City Hall. PZFUN

(That made sense. there's an American Museum of Natural history subway stop too, come to think of it...)

Thanks for your kind words on featured article page, but I don't think this one is going to make it somehow. The boldened dates are a problem, but Bishonen and I felt that with so much goung on at the same time, the whole thing could be confusing if there was not some clear time-line. Any way we shall see! At least anyone who is interested can see what the man was about. Been to any good weddings lately Regards Giano 11:57, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Consistency at Wikipedia best lies within articles, and within closely-linked groups of articles. Keeping the reader constantly in mind is the prime objective. If bolded dates make a text read, go for them! I fear the subject will raise blue-collar hackles. Subject-matter rather than treatment seems to garner votes for features. Some voted-in featured articles have been such embarassments that some people ahem have spent long hours making them presentable... after the fact! (No, I haven't. Not even any stylish funerals: I dare not say what I think of Ronald Reagan's boots backwards in the saddle of the riderless horse-- his war service was all in Hollywood, though such distinctions seemed to blur in his own mind too... No riderless horse for me, though, please....)
I blame the Queen Mother! Giano 12:59, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
We have temporarily removed John Vanbrugh, as Bishonen has a heap more stuff to say on the subject, and I want to do a bit little about Seaton Delaval Hall; have played with the bold dates, but to be honest I like them - they are the only thing that lets me know where I am and what he is doing simultaneously, the whole page would sink into mass confusion without them! Thans for the nomination though Giano 13:54, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
We await his grand return. Wetman 21:44, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
We are not as sensitive (as below) at JV, I've been a bit bold in the new Seaton Delaval section and wonder if I've advanvced my own theories too far, welcome an oppinion, might not agree and change, but would like to know what you think Giano 21:49, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Vanbrugh: the blank space[edit]

Hello, Wetman, thanks for addressing the blank space problem on John Vanbrugh, I always hated that space. On the other hand, some people seem to think it's extremely important that the portrait of the person meets the eye immediately, right at the top, when you go to an article about an individual, so I'm not sure. What I want, I suppose, is something that shows the Kneller portrait immediately, flows text into all other spaces, works with and without the TOC being displayed, and equally well in all browsers... yeah... that's it, that'll do me. ;-)--Bishonen 21:46, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That "Contents" box should be closed, unless you actively click on it. It's a menace as it stands. The only answer is to have a one-line lead-in sentence and go right to the first subsection, which is clumsy. Revert if you don't like my fiddle. --Wetman 01:40, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
No, I like your fiddle, I just wish there existed some more ideal fiddle. I'm not sure I understand how you mean about the TOC being a menace "as it stands"? I assumed all pages were the same, and each user decided whether they wanted to see the TOC or not? Are you saying the page has a default of its own, not the same as all other pages, either displaying or hiding the TOC, unless the user overrides it? (And can that default be changed?) Sorry if I'm totally babbling, it's very late where I am.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (Talk)]] 02:42, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Um, I meant "as it stands in general for me." No, not a separate default. So, is there a way I can set my own default to "Hide TOC"? That would fix the whole problem for me. I haven't found such an option at "Preferences." (You see what a boob I am, really...) --Wetman 18:11, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
You're asking me? Ha, there you go, I thought I managed several convincing-sounding terms there. All done with mirrors, I'm afraid. No idea about any user default, sorry. (The blind leading the blind...)--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (Talk)]] 19:09, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You should keep an eye on the main Medici page. Adraeus has started working on it, and he's impossible for me to work with - has his own idiosyncratic ideas (including not following common usage), insists on having things his own way, gets into edit wars if he doesn't get it, and is generally a hassle. So to keep sane, I've stopped watching it (there's plenty of other things for me to do), but someone should (he makes all sorts of mistakes and doesn't catch them). Noel 17:54, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thank you. I've put it on watch. I'll be cautious. And I'll avoid feeling possessive about the text. Wetman 21:44, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

(Talk:Medici gives the flava.)

Hi: I'm not so good at figuring out who added what in an article, but it appears to me that you added a large, very good, segment in the Saint-Gaudens piece that included the "American novelist Winston Churchill." Maybe it said "writer." In any case is the chap the same as the British Winston Churchill? I can change it, but I suspect that there is some American writer who will get left out if I do. Carptrash 04:17, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The "other" Winston Churchill deserves a Wikipedia entry don't you think! (All I know is what I read. Wanna do this one?) --Wetman 04:31, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Well I will check out your WC site, but i just discovered myself that there are indeed two of them, an American and that . . . whatever. Carptrash 04:40, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out that "Habsburg" alone could also serve as an adjective. I learned something new today.

But say, since you seem to know what Vorderösterreich was: you wouldn't also have some knowledge on the Habsburg dynasty? Any interest in helping to clean up our various lists on them? They're pretty messy, and inconsistent, too. The naming of the articles is inconsistent, some are called "of Austria", some "of Habsburg", even if both were in fact archdukes of Austria. Some of the minor lines seem to be missing partly. Some Albrechts have been translated into Alberts, but not all. The same is true for Friedrichs and Fredericks. Disentangling this mess is difficult, because they even had different numbers, depending on their function (e.g. Frederick III, Holy Roman Emperor, who also was archduke Friedrich V of Austria and king Friedrich IV, or archduke Friedrich I of Austria, who is also known as king Friedrich III: he's the one who competed with Louis IV). Finally, I think a category "House of Habsburg" as a subcategory of Category:Royal families might make sense. Lupo 13:42, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC) (I had to beg off. I'm Habsburg-illiterate.)

In case you aren't watching it, I answered your question on Joseph Campbell. Kainaw 19:17, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! I wasn't watching, in fact. Interpretations of a body of myth aren't really provable are they? To be valid, they do need to make sense internally, though, and when applied within the culture at large. The writer's own cultural baggage needs to be kept minimal. Campbell is addressing broad questions of mythic themes, and his generalizations are sweeping, it's true. I find his books thought-provoking. The entry still doesn't encapsulate what Campbell's guiding principles are in examining myth. Criticism would build on that. (No one has yet noted that there are no Native American artifacts at the Metropolitan Museum!) --Wetman 19:49, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. Working on it right now. I am currently going through Stock.xchng, adding photos in a somewhat random order, e.g. a Topless Goddess followed by a cockroach closeup followed by a Ionoc base, and others. I'll see if i can get the doric and corinthic images, too. -- Chris 73 Talk 10:09, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

Yes, please! --Wetman 10:18, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Well, I've decided to to skate. Wikipedia is just not for me.[edit]

Well, it has been interesting, but I can see I just don't fit in here. So, I'd just like to mention I thought my last entries at : "resurrection" and "saints" was some pretty good stuff. Take a gander. You and I never really clicked but you were at least interested in what I had to say. Don't get too wrapped up in that Jesus, the Magician stuff. It's pretty shakey, as are many puzzles in the ancient past. Take care. Man, I'm outta here for good. I'll be a hell of a lot happier. I get too wrapped up in this junk! Magic is alive and well and survives in religion. It is much older and perhaps even stronger than science. It ain't so bad. --Charlie Turek Magician 23 Oct 2004

(Charlie never did log in so we could reach him at a User Talk page. I'm actually not an adherent of "Jesus the Magician" theories, but sensible document-grounded intellectual history that gibes with the rest of what we understand of a culture always deserves a clear airing. The three touchstones of mass culture-- sports, patriotism and cult-- all teach people to place Team ahead of Truth, and it shows at Wikipedia. Charlie seems to have let that beat him down. As for me, I take vacations with the history of Mayonnaise-- though I find contention even there!. --Wetman 22:30, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC))
Nice commentary on the state of the world! :) ---Rednblu | Talk 19:09, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

thanks... I may get around to do some editing at that article, but there are far too many language articles for me to even dream of attempting to keep watch over them all and keep my sanity ;o) I prefer to have a few 'babies' and jump on anyone who attempts to insert nationalistic nonsense there.... dab 14:56, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

mmm... I know just what you mean... --Wetman 15:09, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)


To quote my old Headmaster: "I was both shocked and horrified to see your name on the edit page". as I sit here on a wet English afternoon contemplating a mif afternoon trip to the dentist, I have so far written this:- "Palladian is the adjective used to describe, originally, work by the Italian architect Palladio, and more often today any building which (often very loosely) adheres to the rules of architecture to which Palladio subscribed." - so far not a word more, but the muse will come and I hope to have something for you to tweak in the next couple of days. John Vanbrugh has become an epic work, I think it's pretty good and so does Bishonen, when it's finally finished (hopefully very soon) I think it will find its way onto featured article, and then be attacked, but I hope not broken up and redistrubuted arownd the various connected pages. Its become a bit of a baby, which is silly, but we've become a little protective of it ...dangerous! I shall be more detatched and a lot less verbose on this Palladian. Regards Giano 12:44, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I was fearful of making any edits without raking the arena sand first. I added some empty subheadings and a couple of illustrations... Baroque has recently been removed as a candidate for FA, for lack of references. When content is perceived as inherently elite, it fares poorly, or is that my bias? --Wetman 13:00, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I don't think elite is the word here, I recently saw an advert for a palladian 'mobile-home', in my own home (a showroom of good taste!) we have a bathroom suite known as 'The Palladian' obviously a faithful replica of the 'dual-flush' and 'bidet' first fitted at Villa Capra 'La Rotonda'. Giano 13:17, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Nomination for FA[edit]

John Vanbrugh is finally finished, if you still think its OK, could you renominate it; that's if you want to. I have mixed feelings about it, as I don't want it to be carved up, but Bishonen and I have some sort of maasochistic desire to know what others think - strange!

I have done some work on Palladian, not brilliant, but I think iy will be OK if you could tweak it, and hopefully some-day it will have sections on palladianism arownd the globe; I suppose I should have used the term 'neo-palladian' but decided not to, as it's not in common parlance. Regards Giano 12:35, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Don't worry about John Vanbrugh, it would appear there was a queue (sorry I can never spell that most English of words) Giano 14:37, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

PS: Nice work on Palladian, I think it needs a new title though

Thank you for your vote on FA, that was a really nice thing to say, having spent the last weeks searching the internet for information I am inclined to agree with you, but that would be imodest, I've rather buried JV now, and time to move on, I found a great image today of Villa Capra with a disected drawing, which I am going to upload to Villa Capra, and perhaps Palladian eventually, but at the moment I think Palladian is well balanced for text and images, you mentioned Irish Palladian, I though they were all Adam and neo-classical, I know Castlecoole, but that is neo-classical, have you a name to start me off, what is Russborough, I know the name, I'll look it up. Thanks again - Giano 18:07, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)


Thanks for the nice comments. I was actually doing a new article Nibelung (a topic obviously overlapping with Burgundians) and was checking all blue links in preview for any further information in related articles or modifications to be made in them. Too often when checking links from new articles or expanded articles I find myself holding my nose and trying not to look at the mess I'm linking to or modifying with a new backlink because I've already too much that I want to do elsewhere to fix up still one more mess. Just get in, make few quick necessary changes in respect to what I am working on, then run away. Burgundians was too closely connected with Nibelung for me to just ignore, but the article was in quite reasonable shape. My Nibelung research had naturally tumbled into some areas where that article was weak, especially in giving a source for the supporting reference to bound skulls in Burgundians graves provided by an anon. But few changes were required. I'm unsure about some features I didn't touch (because I don't know the history of that period well). Why is the name of Gundaharius' successor not the same in as that in the external link and is this successor known to be of the same family? I was tempted to remove the reference to Viktor Rydberg. The connection between Bornholm and Burgundians seems to be generally accepted as a reaonable possiblity. But mention of Rydberg's name in the reference is likely to cast unfair doubt the other way for readers who know anything about Rydberg. A reference to Rydberg's work suggests an unscholarly writer who knows no better. I am pleased that a lot of references to Rydberg have vanished from the Norse mythology area ... and not by my doing—at least not directly. I'm working on Scylfing now. But if I do stumble across a better secondary commentary on the Thorsteins saga Víkingsonar reference, I'll come back and use it as a replacement to the Rydberg reference. Jallan 04:14, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)


Just letting you know that I thought you might be interested in taking a look at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/High schools, as well as what I wrote on Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy. Lowellian (talk)[[]] 05:42, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)

Hi. Wanted to alert you to my Talk post at this article. What was your source for the pronouciation? Cheers, mat_x 08:11, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC) (Local connections, my answer was.)

Hey Wetman, I was just wondering if you might like to comment on the First Crusade article - a lot of work has been done on it lately, and I think it might be on the verge of becoming a featured article candidate. If you have any thoughts about it, I raised some points on the talk page. Thanks! Adam Bishop 06:25, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Well, thanks! Flattered to be alerted, I've begun working down the sections, adding detail and some cautious interpretation. I have many quibbles, but they're mostly just quibbles. Your illustrations are a good start. A map of the Levant would be very useful. --Wetman 11:11, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Easton Neston[edit]

Could you be really kind and do a copy-edit, and/or make some additions and/or corrections to Easton Neston an example of what poor old unapreciated Hawksmoor could do before Vanbrugh stole his glory. Thanks Giano 14:54, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Aside from my usual minor tightening of your good stuff, Giano, my best contribution is the external link. You might want to de-emphasize Wren's role: Howard Colvin's Biographical Dictionary of British Architects doesn't link Wren to Easton Neston, and the British History Online site denies it. Jean Tijou isn't a familiar enough name to be referred to just as Tijou, I think: should "French Baroque" be appended to disambiguate his style, unfamiliar to most readers? Am I right about the divided staircase? Is is a "flying" stair (escalier volant)? --Wetman 15:48, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The stairs may well be, but on the subject of Wren, that's interesting, very interesting? as only Mark Girouared makes the claim, to be honest I was less than pleased to fing it, and only inserted it in the inyerests of honesty, I was tempted to supress it, he did though create the side wings, allthough it is commented about that it was out of Hawksmoor's charactor to be quite so outspoken about them as he was. I am away untill Sunday from tomorrow so will add and research a little more then. Thanks for the edits and advice, please wade in should you feel tempted! Giano 16:04, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Without wishing to cap your story, this was in the last year in an illustrious person's obituary in the London Times (I say this as these stories are so often apocryphal, but this one really is true): the previous but one Duchess of Devonshire asked the children of the local vicar to tea and play games with her own children, one of the vicar's children climbed into a huge Chinese vase to hide, when not found, climbing out unaided the vase toppled and and broke, the distraught Vicar offered to pay the damage (probably about ten years salary) The Duchess replied: "Oh its quite alright, it really was only a very old vase"
I had a look at the photographs I have (sadly all copyright), the stairs are quite conventional two straight flights without division, I can't think of the name, its mentally blocked "without obvious support" it will come to me in the middle of the night. I don't know the English for a staircase that divides, the word I use would translate as an 'Imperial staircase' does that sound correct to you?. I've removed the assertion that Wren designed the house, but left in about the two wings as too many people attribute those to him.
I'm going to do something about the Nicholas Hawksmoor page sometime, researching Vanbrugh I found quite a bit, that makes me believe he was completely unappreciated, and probably deserved a great deal more credit than Vanbrugh allowed him to receive, but John Vanbrugh was becoming far too long (for some people!) as it was, although all the support for a long article was very encouraging. Will do some further research when I come back on Sunday. Regards. Giano 16:33, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You're not an admin?[edit]

I just saw on WP:RfA that your not an admin yet. Would you mind if I nominated you? Sam [Spade] 19:28, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

No, please. I've turned it down twice. I'm just fine as I am. But thanks for the compliment. --Wetman 19:29, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
OK, keep up the good work! Cheers, Sam [Spade] 22:07, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Adminship again[edit]

Recently I did some analysis of contribution history for Wikipedia, the fruits of which are at Wikipedia:Another list of Wikipedians in order of arrival. As I reviewed the list, I noted that there are about a dozen longtime contributors who have not been made administrators. You are one of them. Accordingly, I would like to nominate you for adminship, with your permission. If you would appreciate such a nomination, please let me know on my talk page. If you do wish to decline, a note so saying would also be appreciated, though not necessary. Kindest regards, The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:48, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'd be a terrible administrator, UC: I have no patience. I'd burn out in a matter of weeks. I'm also out of synch with Wikipedia's natural populist bias. I do believe that some ideas are better than others. I believe in expressing balanced assessments and mainstream points-of-view, without apologetic weaselling. I feel that even drollery and wit are not out of place in some entries. So I have to say "thanks, but no" again. It's still flattering to be asked, though. (See above.) --Wetman 21:02, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Eocene etc[edit]

Thanks for the comments... am planning to get around to the rest of the Cenozoic bit by bit. cheers Mackinaw 21:43, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)


Greetings, stranger. There are meetups in New York (at the Argosy book store) and Boston this weekend and next; I hope you can make it to one of them. +sj+ 00:34, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

There is a meetup in NYC scheduled for Sunday, December 12 as well. (same link) Ram-Man (comment) (talk)[[]] 23:29, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

Should that get a separate page and then have a disambiguation page? Just wondering... --Spangineer 18:49, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Probably. I just wanted to get a reference in. --Wetman 18:56, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Found a much bigger article about the Middle English poem - Pearl (poem). I put a link to Pearl (disambiguation) at the top of The Pearl to take care of it... though I'm beginning to wonder if The Pearl should instead be titled The Pearl (Steinbeck) or something similar... --Spangineer 00:27, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)
I think The Pearl (novella) would be in line with other disambiguations. It's something between a story and a novel, yes? (I've not read it.) I think Pearl S. Buck should be removed from the disambiguation, as Pearl is her first name, like Pearl Bailey et al. (i.e. on general principles.) --Wetman 00:45, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Sounds good - I'll take care of that now... redirect The Pearl to Pearl and move The Pearl to The Pearl (novella) - yeah you're right, the book's not really long.Spangineer 01:29, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
Cool. --Wetman


thanks for your Venus tablets websearch! I'm struggling with Chronology of the Ancient Orient, at the moment. Feel free to chime in ;) (note the two 1911(?)-articles linked from 'see also'). I am trying to unify 2nd millennium dates to short chronology. I am not sure if this is very intelligent, but it seems that nobody believes in middle chronology anymore... dab 12:20, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

An essential NPOV point in discussing "alternative" chronologies is to identify those chronologies which set out to justify Biblical inerrancy-- an aspect that makes many Wikipedians wary of contributing. --Wetman 12:29, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Cool addition to the stirrup article! - DavidWBrooks 14:13, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! just googled it up, mostly! --Wetman 16:59, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That's great news, I had rather lost the impetus, besides - if it had ever become palladianism around the world, some clever dick would have wanted it split up into a hudred stubs. Look forward to seeing your additions. While writing it I became quite into Irish architecture and have just finished Edward Lovett Pearce and Richard Cassels which were very interesting to research, there's a lot more to do on Cassel's buildings (hint!) I've also just started the Lafranchini brothers which is a stub right now but could be an interesting tie linking palladianism and rococo. Its just lack of fotos that's the big problem, I've even thought abput making my own drawings but skill (or lack of it) is the problem there. Regards Giano 18:03, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Colen Campbell[edit]

Nice improvement: I've just added an image of Marble Hill, last week when I passed, it was still standing. It probably needs a better caption though, I didn't know that was by Campbell, learn something new every day. Giano 20:27, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Sorry just spotted and corrected 'The Vyne' in Hampshire is still very much standing, and a flag ship of English country houses Giano 20:32, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I've rewritten the bit to make it clear that Marble Hill, standing, was by Lord Pembroke, inspired by his own London house by Campbell (demolished). Does The Vyne have the smallest grand staircase you ever trod?--Wetman 20:50, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Indeed it does, I think that really is a double staircase "a series of galleries flanked by corinthian columns - an amazing achievement in the confined space available":(Nigel Nicolson) I put in the bit about the portico being older than Wanstead on a hunch, have just dug a book out, to check, the portico at the Vyne was designed by John Webb in 1654, and it too claims to be the first classical portico on an English house. The Vyne ought to have a page, but I'm getting too many half completed pages as it is, I have yet to finish Compton Wynyates, the trouble with this hobby is one sees a red link and my mind goes off on a tangeant! Giano 22:22, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
John Chute who designed it himself, was in the circle of Horace Walpole, who had all kinds of projects for Gothicising the Vyne, which thankfully never came to fruition, because Chute didn't have Walpole's income, and no heirs besides.--Wetman 23:14, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hello, Re: 'Demon,' One adds weasel words to an entry to give it a kind of false sheen, which helps to prevent passers-by from stepping all over it with big shoes. Meaning, your edit was good, but it's unnecessary to name the weasel.

("Weaselling" is a Wikipedism for adding unnecessary covering expressions like "generally" or "usually' into sentences, in hopes of keeping oneself covered in any eventuality. Not such a big deal, really. Here's anonymous proof, though, that 'Weasel" is too loaded a term and we should come up with a blander synonym... --Wetman 01:28, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC))

Prometheus in chains image[edit]

Thanks for finding that stunning photograph of "Prometheus in Chains." Can you update the copyright status for that photograph? For example, if the site where you found it released that photograph into the public domain, you might so state.  :) That should take care of it. Thanks again. ---Rednblu | Talk 16:13, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Fixed the public domain status and gave the image a good caption. --Wetman 18:39, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Did you get my other message? :) ---Rednblu | Talk 19:38, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)


I just finished a major rewrite on aquarium but I know you're a lot more knowledgeable than I am (I've noticed you on the history of some sites I've also worked on)-- any factchecking and judicious editing would be welcome! Also, I took the liberty of linking to your website, hope you don't mind.

(right, forgot to sign...) Bantman 01:23, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Not at all! I'm proud of my site... but I didn't dare link to it myself! --Wetman 01:28, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up[edit]

Re:Bible conspiracies, thanks for the heads up I had only skimmed the text and inserted some relevant links without really thinking much about the content. -- 04:29, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That "Council of Athanasius" was particularly bogus! --Wetman 04:52, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

"Where are we?"[edit]

Samuel DuBois Cook Fine Arts Center is at Dillard University, New Orleans. If you miss this information in article, you can always edit it. Do so. Darwinek 18:50, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Keeping the reader in mind is always a minimal consideration at Wikipedia. Not everyone is aware that Dillard University is in New Orleans. A separate entry for each residence hall does not help the reader get a general view of the university. I can't be bothered to fix it, either. --Wetman 20:10, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You would think I should know better[edit]

Hi Wetman, I just couldn't stay away till I brought up this one. I see skeptics and the religious always butting heads. I think they missed something. Read a book of essays by native americans and how they were treated by the white eyes. No more of their religion, no more of their language, no more hunting. See my entry The Supernatural as Magic at Supernatural. --Charlie Turek magician 19 Nov 04

I agree that's it's a shameful history, any way you look at it. Are you referring to the entry Cult, by chance? --Wetman 21:21, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Nope. I've said enough already. Gotta pay more atention to other things I think are fun. Have a happy thanksgiving. 20 Nov 04 Charlie Turek

(Charlie is learning when to take entries off his Watch list and turn a blind eye. It's the secret to having fun!)

Quatrième duc de Chose[edit]

I'm not sure to what extent you're being facetious in re my use of the French ordinal at Louis, 4e duc de Noailles. Are you just poking fun, or are you suggesting a change? I note that someone has just moved one of my pages to 5th duc de Noailles, which just looks odd. In using the French ordinal, I am following Britannica's usage, which is about an anglocentric work as you can get. It would be extremely unusual in my field (modern European history) to anglicize a French noble's title (e.g., 4th duke of Noailles), and a partial angilicization is a bit eccentric IMO. --Tkinias 22:50, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Facetious. The vivacious Madame de Pompadour, the young prince de Conti, the last comte de Foix, the ill-advised Dauphin, the late comte de Paris... the fourth duc de Chose, who was the last duke in the line.... With familiarity it won't all seem so odd. --Wetman 17:18, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Ancient Near East[edit]

hi Wetman, I opened Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near East. You would be more than welcome to contribute. dab 18:26, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC) (Scary geography. Turkic nationalism coloring history, zany Christianist perspectives, Bible-wavers, etc . I let that fellowship slide— not for lack of interest, though mine flags after Saladin.)

Kenneth Alan[edit]

Hi Wetman - this banned user is back, masquerading as User:; see e.g. User talk: for examples of identical style of abusive comments towards other users. I gather this extends the ban? And can the IP number be blocked? - MPF 16:10, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

(This is party of why I'm not an Admin.)

Thanks for contributing! Willmcw 05:30, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Becoming a Copyvio Cop[edit]

I'm not sure if you're aware of how it's done, but I've given you a quick description at Talk:Ang Dating Daan, just in case you're not. - Vague | Rant 05:31, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, Rant. I'll copy your instructions here: When you recognize what looks like a copyvio is to shoot on over to Google search for a line of text from the article. I try to avoid using the first sentence, because often a user will modify it, for whatever reason. If you establish that it's a copyvio (that is, if there's no free license listed on the page it's copied from), then you can replace the page's content with "{{copyvio|url=}}". Once you've done that, head off to Wikipedia:Copyright problems and report it there by posting "[[Article]] from []. ~~~~" And there you have it. Okay, now I have the recipe... --Wetman 05:37, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing[edit]

I've "started" the Free the Rambot Articles Project which aims to get users to release all of their contributions to the U.S. state, county, and city articles (if any) under the CC-by-sa 1.0 and 2.0 license (at minimum) or into the public domain if they prefer. A secondary, but equally important, goal is to get those users to release ALL of their edits for ALL articles. I've personally chosen to multi-license all of the rambot and Ram-Man contributions under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License so that other projects, such as WikiTravel, can use our articles. I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all your contributions (or at minimum those on the geographic articles) so that we can keep most of the articles available under the multi-license. Many users use the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or even {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) on their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I understand, but I thought I'd at least ask, just in case, since the number of your edits is in the top 100. If you do want to do it, simply just copy and paste one of the above two templates into your user page and it will allow us to track those users who have done it. For example:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:


Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain (which many people do or don't like to do, see Wikipedia:Multi-licensing), you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}} -- Ram-Man 23:58, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)

Omar Khayyam on Iram of the Pillars[edit]

Are you sure that quote from Khayyam is about Iram of the Pillars? Iram also means 'garden', I don't think here it has anything to do with a city in Arabia. Especially since he mentions Jamshid, a legendary Persian king. I'll find the Persian version to clarify this. Kaveh 11:10, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I didn't know that: Bagh is the word I usually see. "Garden" is so often part of a city name, isn't it? I'm pretty vague in this area, however... Any more you can dig up? How about quotes from the Qu'ran? --Wetman 11:25, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I searched ارم (Iram) in an online Persian copy of the Rubaiyat, couldn't find any references. I also searched Jamshid, and found results in different contexts. I think this is just Fitzgerald's interpretation and even then probably doesn't have anything to do with Iram of the Pillars. Probably Iram here is part of the phrase Bagh-e Eram, which I think refers to the Garden of Eden. In Persian, as you stated, Bagh is commonly used for garden, though Pardis is more accurate. Although I don't know many examples, in which Bagh is used in part of a city name. Qu'ran is not my cup of tea, but you can find Sura 89 here Kaveh 05:31, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
"Baghdad?" I'm not much of a Koranist myself, but you should collect these thoughts and enter them at Iram of the Pillars. --Wetman
Bagh (باغ) as in garden is prononced bágh. Bagh as in god (بغ), as in Baghdad (God-given), is prononced bægh. In conclusion, I think it's safe to remove the reference to Khayyam. Kaveh (talk)[[]] 06:22, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
(I'm glad I've not built an elaborate theory on the "baegh" of Baghdad, eh!)

Can I interest you in making a copy edit, or even huge expansion to my latest offering. As you know I can never see my own mistakes, so I would appreciate your help. Hope all is well. Regards Giano 14:47, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

What a handsome entry. I'll collate it with Howard Colvin, which is on my desk. Again, not your kind of house, I suppose. I was there many years past, while the Velasquez now at the Met was still in situ and was asked if there was anything in the library I particularly would like to see, and didn't even know about the Leicester Codex of Leonardo drawings, which I might have looked at... It's all wasted on the young, isn't it? --Wetman 15:05, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
No you're right, it's not my kind of house, I've seen it, been inside it, and left it! I wrote the page because it is, I grudgingly admit, of architectural merit and historical value, but my dislike may have come across so you can conceal that for me if you can. To my eyes these great clodhopping masses of stone never look right in the English countryside, the English somehow lost the delicacy and balance of Palladianism, and the great hall to me is more reminiscent of a bath-house/bordello with a staircase leading to an opera tier. The contents though are something else, but that's another story. Woburn Abbey almost works and sits happily in its setting only because half of it was demolished, thus allowing a square box to become something flowing, sadly the demolotion was due to dry-rot and lack of funds rather than appreciation of form. I'll leave you with that massive peice of POV Giano 18:44, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Do you know the title of the painting by Velasquez, it might be an idea to try to put an image of it on the Holkham page - lost treasures etc.!!! 17:48, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)Giano 17:49, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC) sorry forgot to log in!
It was at Longford, not Holkham. (I never had lunch at Holkham, actually.) I'm thinking of Velasquez' Juan de Pareja, now here at the Met. These are memories of 40 years past... --Wetman 20:04, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, I know the feeling, I have a problem remembering last week, especially after a good lunch Giano 16:39, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Triskelion on pottery[edit]

sadly, no -- I am no expert (attic 4th century was a complete "pot-shot"). I am not even sure it is properly called black-figure pottery (which according to that article went out of style before 500 BC). I just did a "black-figure" google image search, and many pieces very similar to this one showed up. And my source is a shabby geocities site. So, yeah, of course it could be South Italian, but I guess the symbol was pretty much "pan-mediterranean" at that time... [[User:Dbachmann|dab (T) ]] 11:07, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I agree about the ubiquity of the archaic symbol. Just hoped to place the pottery... --Wetman 11:11, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The Moon dying at night?[edit]

Hello Wetman :) - I was reading the page about the moon (mythology) in Danish, and I can see that the page has been translated from the UK version. I wonder about a strange information that you have written "In ancient times, it was not uncommon for cultures to believe that the Moon died each night, thus descending into the underworld". Now I would like to know where this information comes from, as I've never heard about it before, only in connection with the Sun. Sophilia

What was I thinking in the heat of August? Lunar rhythms are monthly, not daily, for a start. What a miserable stub of an entry that still is. The subject deserves better. Let's get to work. --Wetman 23:47, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"not encyclopedia material", I think your exact words were?

Surely "{{Move to Wiktionary}}" would be more appropriate? Brianjd

However, it is now a redirect to Flops. Brianjd

Aha! So that's how it's done! I learn slowly... Thanks. (mumbles "Move to Wiktionary. Move to Wiktionary. Move to Wiktionary.")--Wetman 06:55, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Architect earl[edit]

Thanks! Great bio. I removed the stub templates for you. :-)--[[User:Bishonen|Bishånen (tåk)]] 07:33, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Its nice to see an architectural subject having its moment of fame, however looking at the recent edit history, we may have to spend more time than ever on it tomorrow! A beautiful job at Richard Boyle, 3rd Earl of Burlington we will have to find it a picture. One of the Holkham ones would do, perhaps, until one of Chiswick can be found. Flitcroft's name has started to pop up with some frequency, we shall have to give him some thought in the future.Giano 08:14, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

That was a very quick and thorough piece of work. Wikipedia is looking up. I'm sure I have referred to him erroniously as William Flitcroft somewhere on Wikipedia, but I can't find where, we had better keep a look out for it. I have been digging about for fotos of Woburn, we took the children to see the lions when they were small, and I'm sure I took loads of pictures of the house. Palladian architecture suffered about 53 edits yesterday, and amazingly with only a few minor reversions seems to be back where it started more or less. Mathew Brettingham may be my next target, as I suspect he was largly uncredited for a lot of work at Holkham. Keep up the good work Giano 08:21, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Google picks up no "William Flitcroft" at Wikipedia. Maybe it was one of those Wikipedia-editing dreams you've been having lately, mmm?... --Wetman 08:43, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Something weird going on with Dante Alighieri. It looks like you added the Castagno fresco at the same time as I did, yet I didn't get an edit conflict. Sorted now. -- Solipsist 08:49, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I keep checking the Image Upload, for fear good images will get lost (a while ago I went through all 10,000 homeless images giving captions to orphans, so I know it can happen.) Sometimes I find good second uses for images. See Acculturation. Sorry to snafu. --Wetman 08:53, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The Humungous Image Tagging Project[edit]

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)


You made an excellent point on Talk:Morocco. Please see my answer on this page. Gidonb 23:04, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Does the above page mean anything to you? before I waste any more time cleaning it up. Nothing in any of my books about them! Matthew Brettingham is coming soon, waiting for a book, I have just sent for, which is probably held up in the Christmas mail. Giano 13:24, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The entry looks like a download of a local history monograph, copyright problems, on a family of provincial architects at Nantes. Wikipedia needs a broader brush, describing the character and growth of the 10 or 20 major cities of France, before getting into this kind of localized detail, I'd say. I have Howard Colvin's book in the other room, by the way, for Brettingham's houses... --Wetman 13:44, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I started to tidy it up attracted by the word architect, then began to realise (I think) it some-one's private family history, doubtless thrilling to them, but for the rest of us..........! If you don't know anything about them either, I think I'll leave them alone. I have recently become addicted to buying second hand books off the internet and found an old one about Matthew Brettingham, there's quite a bit about his buildings in books and on the internet, but not much on him, as soon as this comes I'll start it, unless you want to start with a list of his houses and whatever else you have, I have a picture from VB of the plan for York House in London, I'm sure there will be one or two other images arownd, as you may have noticed I've found a willing supplier of country house photos, which is great, but I don't want to ask too many favours too quickly! Regards Giano 14:16, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

County of Foix[edit]

Thanks! By the way, there is a discussion at Talk:List of state leaders in 1124 about what can be considered an independent state in the middle ages, if you're interested (I stopped kind of arbitrarily at 1124 just to sort things out, and we're mostly having trouble with France, the HRE, and Russia). Adam Bishop 18:26, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Filoli images[edit]

Actually , I contributed the Image:FiLoLiGardenPool.JPG:garden picture in the article. The other images were insufficient for a gallery or a virtual tour, perhaps next time. If there is anything you would like to see from S.F., just post it in my talk page. I'm glad you liked the Pomona/Diana decoration image. All over NYC one can see one or the other, this was the only place I saw both together. My complements on your additions and editing to the text in the image file - it could be a well filled stub article now. Leonard G. 01:50, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)


I'm not really an expert on the peerage of any country, I only wrote Almanach de Gotha because at the time I was irritated by an asumption by an editor (whose name escapes me!) that the British peerage was the best bred and oldest. However, Viscount looks great to me, although if you are going to dabble in the Italian aristocracy prepare to drown in the confusion. My grandparents generation did not recognise any nobility not recorded in "Libro d'Oro della Nobilta Italiana" which was compiled in the mid 19th century to attempt to unify and standardised all the various nobles created by different princes, Popes and Kings. The current "Libro d'Oro" is not considered quite as elite or reliable. Then there are of course the titles created by Napoleon, rather sneered at by the older nobility.

I would imagine that like the sons of a Conte or Marchese the son of a Visconte would be officially titled "nobile dei visconti di X") Having said that I can think of some modern families where all the children are addressed as Conte or Contessa,(or whatever their father is) this usually happens in the country where the family are well known though; Don and Donna (supposedly (I think) for junior principe/essa but in fact adopted by others) are not really used now, and to many noble offspring the whole thing is a minor embarrassment.

And finally, always remember the Counts of Ciampino: When Umberto II was leaving Ciampino Airport for the final time he ordered an aid to give his 'accounts' to some members of his staff standing nearby, in the noise and confusion of the day, and the fact the King was waving to the hundreds who had come to wave him off into exile. the aid misunderstood and issued a proclamation ennobling the entire crowd to the rank of Count. Giano 10:43, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Dimmi! material for the Secret Wikipedia! An old acquaintance who was actually quite rightly D, conte di SM, though married to a lady only dei principi O, but who was always principessa, remained contino all his life, in local deference to a forceful late father, deceased for decades... The current Burke's is also casually debased I hear-- though how would I know? --Wetman 11:36, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
But then of course today we have the Principe DP in Rome who has really confused the sytem! Giano 12:09, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Chanson d'Antioche[edit]

That's awesome! I was going to write that myself, so you've saved me some work :) Adam Bishop 17:02, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

That's praise! Thank you. --Wetman 17:09, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Middle Ages project[edit]

Wetman, Ive set up a Middle Ages project. Here is an example announcement about it to send to other people who might be interested. Let me know what you think about this idea or feel free to edit the project page.

A new community group has been created for those working on articles related to the Middle Ages and thought you might be interested. It is a gathering place for those with a common interest in Medieval history. It's a place to announce new articles related to the Middle Ages, general discussions or questions, see who else is out there in Wikispace. Feel free to join or lurk, if you know anyone else that might be interested who is a regular contributor in this area, please pass along the word. The project page is here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Middle_Ages.. --Stbalbach 22:26, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In spite of a fine arts course hundreds of years ago - I "think" on fabric a tin glaze, especially on a tappestry can be called istoriato, but I've a feeling its not the same thing at all as on Maiolica. However, fear not, my wife will know. Giano 10:50, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Such as Toile de jouy, with views printed from engraved blocks? Hmm. Woven istoriato textiles would be more to the point. Do ask. --Wetman 11:03, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The term 'istoriato style' became popular from the 16th century, and could be applied to a tappestry, or any other decorative object, as well a maiolica, especially if the tappestry was depicting a tale in an allegorical fashion. As an expression the term could be applied to anything in fact that tells an ancient tale, but in the wonderful world of objects d'art it is generally ceramics. Giano 12:07, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Thank you. That makes perfect sense. No essential connection with weaving in particular... --Wetman 12:15, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I have no idea. 'he who saw the deep' sounds like an incipit, 'Gilgamesh in the Netherworld' less so.... dab () 17:31, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Exactly! I'll try to do it myself... There! I hope that's not too clunky. --Wetman 17:49, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Nazarene article[edit]

You might want to keep an eye on the article, it seems it is undergoing some major POVing again. Jayjg 02:07, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Alas, all I can assess is the text that deals with the NT and patristic uses. I know nothing of the modern Nazarenes, though I detect that sensible phrases are being suppressed or tweaked on both sides here. I dislike contentious anonymous editing in itself, though --Wetman 03:50, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

On cleanup at Appositive[edit]

Commonly a user applying a cleanup notice to an article gives some hint of what is missing, or what needs work, in that article's Talk page. A more stylish technique is to actually do the cleanup editing oneself. Stickers are more easily applied, it is true. --Wetman 13:57, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

While this is generally true, and I apologize for not pointing out the perceived deficiencies of the article appositive on the articles's talk page, one might not always be able to do the "stylish" thing. One might, for instance, lack the time to revise the article just now, yet feel the need to point out its shortcomings. One might also lack the knowledge or insight required to revise the article, yet still be able to perceive the need for such a revision. Burschik 08:07, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

(Whimsical "cleanup" notice removed.)

Someone seems to have had some very anbitious ideas!!! Busy over Christmas? Giano 20:23, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wow! Huge subject! A node through which every thread of UK history is passed. Got to be a network of linkings... --Wetman 20:36, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
While you are waxing lyrical. its chianti over the yard arm time here (or whatever the idiom is), so I am signing off for the evening, I have left my views on the talk page, if this new user is serious, it could be fun (seriously pruned), but its a major project. What's your view, a list of links, or a real explanation and page? I have saved the old page to The English country house just in case the new man doesn't step back out of the pavillion (another English idiom) Happy christmas Giano 20:49, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Have the distinct impression (from the talk page) the new man wants to go it alone, perhaps we have a new Mark Girouard in our midst. Will watch with interest, still waiting for the Mathew Brettingham book, have chased them up twice, they'e charged £10 for postage and packaging, I could have nearly flown here myself for that at one time this year. Giano 15:41, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC

add When you recognize what looks like a copyvio is to shoot on over to Google search for a line of text from the article. I try to avoid using the first sentence, because often a user will modify it, for whatever reason. If you establish that it's a copyvio (that is, if there's no free license listed on the page it's copied from), then you can replace the page's content with "{{copyvio|url=}}". Once you've done that, head off to Wikipedia:Copyright problems and report it there by posting "[[Article]] from []. ~~~~" And there you have it. Okay, now I have the recipe... --Wetman

Hi Wetman - Advice needed. User:Pcpcpc has been slanging off the Country housepage for ages, had a wild disagreement with him on his talk page, he claims all the facts are wrong, and I know nothing, he makes wild allegations on his talk page and then deletes them into the history file so no one can read them, now on his talk page he is blaming me for mistakes he has made. What does one do here, its new territory for me, Geogre says ignore him, but its becomng very hard, have just left him a terse message, bit that's probably deleted by now. Sorry don't mean to wing, have to sound off to somebody - Giano

Just don't fret. Take Country house off your Watchlist and remember that nothing is lost. These people lose interest after a while; then you can go back and see whether there is anything among all the edits to be kept, when you rebuild from a more realistic foundation. Meanwhile put your feet up and make notes in Mark Girouard, Life in the English Country House.... --Wetman 16:24, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I suppose you're right (reluctantly agree) not in my nature to take things lying down, he can do what he likes with the page, but not insult me - I'm a Sicilian! To make matters worse the server keeps logging me out, and taking 20 minutes to log me cback in, perhaps its time for a few new year's eve drinks. Happy new year to you. Giano

re: Demon[edit]

(In response to a "thank you");

Merely payback for your vital work on Clamato.

Christian fundamentalists have a terrible time with those Old Testament passages against the kings of Tyre and Babylon. They begin to insist that the dedications are figurative and that they actually refer to Satan -- and then they catch one grinning elliptically and realize at once where the discussion is likely to go next.... Auto movil 17:18, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

...and that's more than I can claim. Clear and neutral is always good. Two characteristics not generally attributed to Clamato. (It's in my fridge, mate.) Happy Saturnalia! --Wetman 17:32, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Fundamentalists don't like to argue in favor of figurative interpretations of any book save Revelations (and even that's a touchy one). It opens many fault lines, not the least of which is in the textual argument toward Creationism. But these are not festive thoughts, and the holdays approach... Auto movil 20:38, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)


As incredible as this may sound, I had to list something of yours on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. Your interpretation of Image:GINCO-Iimage.png as being PD because it is funded by the German government is quite probably incorrect. -- 07:17, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Dang! --Wetman 13:17, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

WikiProject New York City[edit]

Hello, I've started WikiProject New York City, and from your edits it seems you might be interested. See its talk page for the beginning of a discussion on the standardization of neighborhood names, and bringing New York City up to featured status.--Pharos 13:31, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)


I see you've been reading :) ... but we doubled up the references — I snuck in a little ² with a link to the reference section last edit, which you might want to remove if you prefer the (Name, Year) notation. 19:50, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oop! Just as long as there's some kind of link to the reference, all roads lead home! --Wetman 20:09, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Mohammaden (sic)[edit]

Would you mind not using the term "Mohammaden"? Almost all Muslims find it extremely insulting, as it implies they worship Mohammad, as opposed to God. We are supposed to maintain a collegiate atmosphere here, and there's no need to be deliberately abrasive. Graft 22:28, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Mohammedan, not "Mohammaden." I imply nothing. I hear they call us "Franks" or something. I am curiously unmoved. (But when this person invokes "collegiality," the fraudulent gesture has a cheapness to it that "cheeky" does not do justice to. I have been struggling with this one at the entry Gospel of Barnabas, trying to keep the entry honest, without actually mentioning that it is absolutely fraudulent. This in fact is one of the least "collegial" persons of thousands at Wikipedia.) --Wetman 22:37, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hi, Wet, Geogre, and Giano, please excuse a three-person multi-user message or microspam. In case you made a New Year's resolution to help the harrassed, I just thought you might want to redeem it by taking a look at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Chan Han Xiang and, less importantly, Chan Han Xiang's retaliatory RfC Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Gtabary. I don't know the principals, never had speech with or saw them around (maybe Geogre did on VfD) but it's not getting a lot of attention--a little more after I asked dab to take a look this morning (European morning)--and I can't help but feel sorry for the guy who tried to help a countryman and fell through into the fourth dimension. We all know what even much milder cases of that feel like, and this user doesn't seem to have much of a wiki support network. Well, that's how it looks to me, but you'll form your own opinion, if you should feel like making this your good deed of the day. Best wishes,--Bishonen | Talk 15:27, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Bishonen, I'm quick to recommend real nonsense for deletion. But I avoid struggling over non-encyclopedic "noise," because there is so much of it (individual Pokemon characters and the like), and plenty of bandwidth. If there are articles on neighborhoods of Sydney and Toronto (and Upper West Side, to which I've contributed), why not regional hospitals of Malaysia? I'd redirect them to become subsections of entries for their towns or regions, so they don't get lost. But not if there were resistance. I might go back six months later and pull it together though... ;) Illegitimi non carborundum: do schoolboys still say that? "Don't let the bastards wear you down!" --Wetman 17:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
To be absolutely frank, I'm not sure they do, unless they started to after my own boy left school recently. Happy new year, Wetman, and thanks for taking a look!--Bishonen | Talk 17:59, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

what's in a word[edit]

hi Wetman — another microspam; I appear to find myself on another sort of linguistic crusade... I invite you to vote here (some background is here and here). dab () 10:35, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I don't have a really sensible reaction, to be voting. I always think alphabetical lists are easiest to use, even if Abbabbian comes first, and that these other Wikipedias should be at the bottom of the page. --Wetman 17:24, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Random Message?[edit]

Hey. here. You've apprently sent me a message, however I fail to see a reason why. Just wondering why now :)

What has happened is that User:Wetmen (which I assume is the same as Wetman?) created a link to Wetman's talk page in Template:Wrongtitle. I've changed the template back. Wetman, if you are responsible, be more careful in the future; you actually reverted back someone's correction of your mistake! --C S 04:43, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)


Why was the article on Anne Stine Ingstad removed? I admit I'm new here, but as far as I can see, it's neither a hoax nor vandalism. Thanks for explaining. wiegee 06:03, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)

(I looked at the article, which I hadn't seen before, and it looked as though it were all there.)

Huh. Weird. OK... Good night! wiegee 06:12, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Wetman, I would be grateful if you could give Matthew Brettingham a good look over, before anyone else does. It is largely the result of original research from a million or so internet sites, not the best source!

The book I ordered arrived and was worse than nothing, 15 pages in what appeared to be a child's school book, published in 1964, and concerning a court case and nothing else. I am just concerned that some of the dates may not be as accurate as they could be, or a bit too much of my POV may have crept in! I have not sub-divided it, as there is not enough to have more than start - middle -end.

If there is a proper study of the man besides this, I can't find it, would be interesting to know what Howard Colvin has to say on the subject. Regards Giano 16:58, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Giano, it looks very good to me (of course I could give it a tweak), but I can't lay my hands on my Colvin for a while. I'll come back to it, with pleasure, quite soon. --Wetman 17:52, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Why did you turn my stub into a redirect? Is there some wiki principle at work here, or did you just feel like it? (Anonymous)

Context. Anyone looking for Neo-Perennial Philosophy will now get some necessary context. No information was discarded. --Wetman 20:45, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

British Library, Add. MS 5111. 7th century Gospel Book fragment[edit]

Hi, you recently commented on the VfD for British Library, Add. MS 5111. 7th century Gospel Book fragment, which, as you may recall, was listed for having an "ugly" name. That listing has prompted me to write a proposal for a naming convention for articles about manuscripts without names. The proposal can be found here. Any comments you would like to make would be appreciated. Thank you. Dsmdgold 11:00, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

Regarding VFD[edit]

I am not sure if you read the responses after you post to VFD, so I will say it here. Yes, I have posted VFD on all these articles, and this grew out of a discussion from Talk:Israeli violence against Palestinian children. I do not have that much problem with redirecting these articles, but these titles need to be deleted after the articles are moved. Please see the discussion at Talk:Israeli violence against Palestinian children OneGuy 07:02, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

(My concern being limited to resisting suppression of US State Department information unflattering to Islamist agendas. The tasteless headings are easily corrected.)

Again, since it's not clear to me whether you pay attention to responses posted on relevent pages (from your comments), I will post my response here too: Yes, someone named Andylkl deleted parts of article, but the parts that he deleted were not even in the State Department report [2] ... I suggest you should pay more attention when you post comments on RfD or talk pages OneGuy 08:25, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)


I screwed up, but I've been using the internet since the you do not need to be condescending. I meant to put it on your discussion page but I accidentally put it on your regular page. Thank you. --Woohookitty 01:32, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I apologize. I'm having one of those days as they say. I've disammed about 100 pages today and that makes one cranky. :) I apologize. I appreciate the tips, as I am still relatively new to this Wikipedia business. --Woohookitty 01:52, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Since I have your ear. :) How do you get these awards for editing that I see on some pages? I know I know. I could look it up myself. But since you're giving advice and help. :) --Woohookitty 01:54, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)