User talk:Amandajm/archive1
Thanks for your contributions to St. Andrew's Cathedral, Sydney. They need a little work to make them more encyclopedic, but the information you have added is very helpful to the development of the article. Keep up the good work.
Again, welcome! Blarneytherinosaur 03:35, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi! I reverted your edits to Michelangelo because they were highly against the style conventions established in wikipedia:Manual of Style (non standard sub-sub-subsections, titles of header in capital, etc.) However, the addictions could be interesting as well, and if you want you can reinstate them, they will be pleased. Good work. user:Attilios
Hey!
Please be less aggressive. Here the ideal is to be calm and willingly towards other users. As for your remarks, 1. Michelangelo, I reverted ALL you addings to the precedent format, thinking it would be easier for you to get back the new info from the former version (see history sections) using the proper formatting. 2. Architecture etc. I had to leave home before completing the formatting process. I thought it could be an example for you to continue the work of re-styling.
Some notes: it seems your sources have some lack or errors. "Maderna" is clearly Carlo Maderno, for example. Anyway, you're adding valuable infos, but please give also attention to the style. For example, don't use words like "amazingly", "beautiful": here they're considered POV stuff, and are usually removed. Language must follow encyclopedic (i.e. as most as possibile "neutral") guidelines. If you add ton of material, but awfully written, users will take no time to mess up the thing and will revert back abruptly your edits (as, for example, I did... but I've just apologized), the principle being: better something less informative but readable, than something full of info that however will make your eyes explode.
But I repeat: you're addings are very welcome, and continue to work for Wikipedia. Let me know. And good work!!! User:Attilios
- A further note of style. Headers (titles of section) must not have capitals. User:Attilios
- Did some rewriting in your Cathedral architecture of Western Europe. If some titles are not in the correct position or style, please revert them as you prefer but, please, using the standard "==XX==" and "===XXX===" heading system. I repeat, you wrote some valuable things. Simply a note: I known a bit only of Italian cathedrals, and I think the Pisa example is very particular, and somewhat deceptive IMHO. Some other should be cited to give a more general and informative idea (Modena, Milan, for example). See you soon. user:Attilios
Be calmer
I think you're one the most aggressive users I've found here. I think you should give a glance to Wikipedia:Etiquette before talking with me. You should not be so sticked onto your edits: if you wanna stay in a civil way in a open content encyclopedia that anyone can edit, you should learn to treat with people (like me) that will jump one your articles and edit them according to their ideas, that could be different from yours sometimes. Even though my edits can be questionable (like everything in this world), I pretend you'll be polite with me, as well as with all other editors here: menaces like "I will see your edit and check how logic they are" are not welcome, by me at least. If edited something yours, I tried to argument it always. I'm open to debate about all, but only if in a polite way. And I seem I've always spent good works for the substance of your articles, haven't I? As for Pisa, I was simply expressing an opinion: and I think that perhaps my opinion pushed you to add the See also marks, that now make nearly perfect the examples section. As for my articles, they have tons of faults. First, I'm not English mother-tongue, and they need always copyedit in language. Their logic has been sometimes disputed, and sometimes edited back, in a way that I liked or not. I always accepted the debate and found a compromise. So, if you jump on one of my articles and found it has errors, fault, typo, illogical statements, your edits are welcome. I think that's the way to operate in an open-content encyclopedia. Let me know and good work. user:Attilios
Talk pages
Please place new comments at the bottom of the page. For further help, read the talk page header. Thank you. —Viriditas | Talk 09:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Dear Nonna
I've already admitted that my first back-editing was quite rude. The reason is that I have a button allowing me to revert automatically to the precedent version when I see a mess of new things and have no time to check it all. Last weekend I was short of time, and, again I admit it, a bit lazy. I apologize for my brutality, hope you understand. Anyway I think that the Cathedral architecture is nearing perfection for style also: my last suggestion is to add, in the Examples section, at least pictures of other significative buildings, in order to give readers the impression that that's a list of examples and that reality can be far different from what is necessarily a simplification. For an example, check the Duomo article: here I added a picture of the Terracina cathedral, just to tease a bit the reader to go off of the common paths. A suggestion a can give are images from the cathedrals in southern Italy (Trani, Bari, Palermo, or, better, less known ones). Let me know and good work. user:Attilios
- The correct spelling is definitely Carlo Maderno, no other chances (maybe a Latin-like Maderni could have been used in ancient times, but certainly not today, and certainly not the ones you were asking of) possible. All the other ones are the typical typos made by not so accurate and, let me say it, informed English-language scholars. The 1911 Britannica is full of them, and I spent sooooo much time trying to revert them in articles about Italy. Some are quite funy, even. Ciao!
- This does not surprise me. I cannot understand why English people committed (and commits) so many errors for what concerns Italian or Spanish. I think I don't know perfectly English, but I don't write things such as "Westmister" or ". For example, they do not undersand at all the use of apostrophy. Trinita instead of Trinità is a typical error: two words meaning different things. Not to speak about the use of articles "de" or "del", that is so simply exactly the same than your language; or the use of Latin names for cities which have Italian names since centuries. Second, I think that errors span easily due of misinformed books written too many years ago, like the one you referred to, without updating on the progresses made here in Italy. A suggestion to avoid such errors is to go to the Italian Wikipedia and check the correct spelling of things. Ciao!! user:Attilios
Galleries
Ciao! First, it seems your disconnected. You need to click on the right upper corner on Sign in. Second, the easy way to create a gallery is the following:
-
Caption.
-
Caption2.
The idea to add regional gallery examples is very good. See you soon! user:Attilios
Michelango as artist
Put a {{db| I wrote this}} and someone will deleted it. I wouldn't want to do that if you can help it, since the article seems noteworthy enough. Cheers V. Joe 01:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Other talk from User:Valentinejoesmith moved from user page
Welcome!
Hello, Amandajm, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
About your Michelango the Artist page: I have done some things in the nature of a compromise, but before I go into that let me explain myself:
1) A {{verify}} request is quite different from a request for speedy deletion {{delete}}, {{db-bio}}, {{nonsense}} or {{subst:attack}} or an article for deletion by commitee which is {{afd}} or {{notability}} <nowiki>. I reccomended no such thing. 2) I decided to restore your article by going into the page history and adding a <nowiki>{{cleanup}} tag instead. Hopefully that means another, more eligble editor can go behind me and clean it up. Maybe a member of the wikiproject for Italy or for art.
3)If your looking for sources, I reccomend Frederick Rolfe and his "History of the Borgias" his anayzalation of the relationship between Julius II is spot on.
4) Consider wikifying the article yourself, as it certainly appears worthwhile.
Thanks for you patience and sorry about any misunderstanding. V. Joe 21:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
M. the A revisited/The Sistine CHapel
I really don't know how to help you, but check with either the wikiproject art or the Reniassance history pages. Unfortunately, Corvo's book is the closest I have to real knowledge on Michelango, for my historical speciality isn't really art related and I only touch upon art in passing. Thanks V. Joe 03:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
MTHEA part III
Thats fine, its your call. Cheers V. Joe 03:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Sydney Anglicans
Hi Amandajm,
I'm sorry if I've got you ryled up over my changes. Please reinstate the bit about the link to the colony's founding. I'm confused though how an Anglican diocese could exist back to the 7th C since the CoE didn't exist until the 16th C. The other reason I think why Sydney is so rich is because it is the rump of the older Diocese of Australia.
I understand your concern with the young people. I grew up in a conservative Uniting Church and was taugh the creeds and Lord's prayer. I became an Anglican in my 20's for theological reasons. One of the things I appreciated about the Anglicans was the tremendous work of theology and worship found in the prayer book. At my church (thoroughly evangelical) we use elements of the prayer book in all our services - we just need to be sensitive to context. I get thoroughly lost in a full prayer book service with all its collects and special prayers. We often say the Lord's Prayer together, with the words on the OHP or in printed form.
The thing with the article is we need to write a balanced view of the diocese, namely one that reflects the majority opinion while still providing space for the minority critiques. Perhaps that's a good structural idea... We have a section on Evangelical distinctives that sets out the theology of Sydney (or MTC) eg. Biblical theology, amillenialism, etc. Then we have a section on Critiques/Controversies covering things like liturgy, lay presidency and the ordination of women.
I'm off to a conference now and will be back in a few weeks. I trust you'll hold doen the fort in the meantime. :) Journeyman 00:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Talk on user page
Hi - I have deleted your user page as it consisted of talk that I have moved to this page. Hope you don't mind the busybodying, but most users like to create their own page. If you want the comments restored - let me know. It is undoable. Regards--A Y Arktos\talk 02:54, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Christmas tree
- Not a problem I will have a go. There is a tab to the right of "article", "discussion", "history" which is "move" - you just click on that and rename with your reason. It will leave a redirect in place. I have moved it [1] - not sure what else needs to be fixed. Regards--A Y Arktos\talk 09:09, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Ciao! Just completed the article on the Cathedral of Bari. Do you have some time to check my English and architectural stuff in it (I admit I'm an amateur of the fiedl)? A question: what's the English term for matroneum? Let me know what do you think of the article... bye. --Attilios 10:02, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Priesthood of all believers
I understand how such apparent hypocrisy can be upsetting, but the "priesthood of all believers" is subscribed to by even the Roman Catholic Church (which also reserves the "ministerial" priesthood to men). The idea isn't that all believers can or should be ordained, but that all are God's people (the "royal priesthood, a people set apart"). Carolynparrishfan 17:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- I've written something to this effect on the Sydney Diocese talk page. It's a difference in the greek between presbyter and priest. Presbyters are ordained by the church, priests are not. Journeyman 06:21, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Bye
Hi! No, I was surfing amongst Italian communes and, sometimes, on other far different stuff. Have you given a check to Category:Cathedrals in Italy? It would redirect you to some articles or sections with interesting cathedrals and churches, and of course your copyediting will be welcome there (remember I'm not of English mothertongue). As for the grunting person: the guy is a Norwegian whose wife is from Cannalonga, Italy. He edits only Cannalonga, and is of course stuck with his version of the article. The problem is that it's full of bad style and grammatics errors ("Provence of Bari"..., "9th century a.D.", etc.). Further, he continues to add "The most common family name is Cortazzo", probably 'cause her wife is Cortazzo also by surname, eh eh. Examples of such behaviours are in Wikipedia:Vanity.
As for style, the articles on my PC looks always great after my editing. I think problems can stem from:
- We're using different browsers. I use Explorer, for instance.
- We have different area monitors. I have a 15" laptop.
Ciao! --Attilios 10:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Re: Poor Man's Bible
You're welcome! :) --Varco 17:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- you wrote "Maybe this year will be the year." - if you do, visit Old Marinerrs' [2] ClemMcGann 14:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
- ours is a volunteer run museum as well, if you make it, call me ClemMcGann 15:14, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Ciao! I'm again here and again with both good and bad news for you. First, the compliments: what you wrote in Fra Angelico article is exactly what we need here in neglected sectors of culture (here almost everybody writes of TV, pop stars, wrestling, football and other stupid stuff): informative, in-depth and accurate stuff. But now we come to what in Italian we call the dolenti note (in you know a bit of Dante you'll be able to translate it). Your article is full of sentences with are totally out of the encyclopedical tone which is expected here. Examples (not your exact words bit gives an idea):
- "If one looks at XXXXX one will receive the beautiful feeling that ..."
- Unappropriate: 1) use of first person; 2) emotional adjectives like "beautiful", "mind-inspiring", "stupendous" are strong unadviced here.
- "Beato Angelico, who painted in the Early Renaissance, was one of the most beloved painters of its times, so much was the love for him that ..."
- Abstracts must be less bombastic: a more appropriate version should be "Beato Angelico (14xx-14xx) was an Italian early Renaissance painter" and stop. "Beloved", "so much" and other para-hagiographic stuff must be cut off at all. If you want to stress things about debatable things as love, popularity, beautiness etc., you must be very careful with the words you use. Never
- I found also typos like "It's importance is...", but you'll be able to remove them easily.
- Title of headers must be less phrasal than stuff like (again not exactly what you wrote, of course)===Fra Angelico's most popular works - The works in Santa Croce. It's clear that we are speaking of Angelico, no need to repeat his name in the titles. "Most popular works" is debatable, and anyway sounds bad for a title. I'd prefer a simpleWorks in Santa Croce and let inform the reader that those was its most popular or good works simply saying something like "his masterwork was etc. etc" or "what was perceived as his masterwork", or similar.
Well! Hope you won't rage again against me as the first time with the Cathedrals. I've in fact started pointing out that what you wrote was good, but was badly written. But not "bad" in itself: your style would be fairly appropriate for a history of art book, but is strongly against the famous WP:POV purpose and the tone of this encyclopedia. In conclusion: I've given a premilimary check to your article, removing something, but still it needs much of cleaning up and wikifying. Read in depth Wikipedia:Manual of Style and then return to Fra Angelico to bring it to feature article status. For a comparison, see also the style in Caravaggio, which IMHO is a good encyclopedical artist entry; see also the format of the sub-article there listing the works. See you soon!! --Attilios 23:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC) (P.S.: also Verrocchio, if you like him, would need an intervention from you. It's far shorter than Britannica's).
Attention Attilios,
What I hhave done with this article is remove most of, and rewrite the rest of a long article which came sttraight from Brtannica 11.. The article was appalling. It was totally un encylopedic. It showed no appreciation or understamding of Fra Anngeliico's art. It made comments like "Some people find the sweet prettiness appealing but it's pietistc......."
There was a link to "Pietism" and a statement at the beginning drawn from the Britannica to say that Fra Angelico was a "Pietistic" paiinter. WTF does "Pietistc" mean in 21st Century Engliish? Well, if you followed the link of this antiquated word,, you find a wikipage about "Pietism" that links to the Reformation annd to Martin Luuther. Now, I would think that Fra Angelico was the absolute antithesis of the Reformation.. He was a truly devout and conservative Catholic monk, if his paintings are any indication.. So the ignorant quote and well-meaning link were mmade by someone who had no real understanding of the religious climate of the 15th ccentury. On the other hand, to make the statement that he was one of the best-loved painters ofthe Early renaissance may not be "entirely within wiki rules, but it is at the very least true and secondly clear.
The introductory paragraph started with the a very long name- every title he was ever known by, jammed together as if it was actually a) his correct name b) what he was actually called.
In fact, it was neither of these things. He was known as several things, but not ALL of them simultaneously. So I rewrote the paragraph, from an inexplicable, innacurate, but oh so encyclopedic mess to something accurate and easy to follow.
Don't tell me as an art historian that I cannot use "beautiful" in an encyclopedic article.
Before you do that, I suggest you read the crap from Encyclopedia Britannic that well-meaning wikis keep dumping onto these pages.
- Long convoluted sentences of absolute waffle.
- Critcisms of the artists work instead of assesment.
This guy (can't remember his name- he was a relation of the Rosettis) writes thing liike "The colours are too bright." Unfortunately, he appears to have been the major writer on Early Renaissance art for britanjica and now, almost every Wiki page on that subjject has been contaminated with his meandering verbose biographies and his inept, neggative POV comments that pass as Critical Assesment of the artists work.
Please go back and actually read what this article said before I rewrote it into a form that might actually be useful to a person who wants to learn something about Fra Angelico.
Now, one of the things that you have done is remove the clear list giving a time-frame in point fashion. If you are going to do this, then please read the rest of the article and devise appropriate heading for the *s that you are removing.
--Amandajm 04:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. Hope you're not not angry for my comments... I didn't know "bombastic" was unpolite, sorry sorry! As for the 1911, it was famous for being very POV: the write Jorge Luis Borges complained indeed that modern Britannica had lost this very personal and subjective approach to the articles!! Bye and compliments for good work.--Attilios 08:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
St. Andrew's Cathedral, Sydney
Hi Amadajm,
I see you've been putting in a lot of work at the St. Andrew's Cathedral, Sydney, article. Just a comment about all the pictures. First, it's great to see you using a gallery, but maybe a few pictures should be in it. I've added the picture of Bishop Broughton, and the one of his memorial, to the article about him. The article doesn't mention his memorial, so maybe this picture could be removed, at least to the gallery. I don't think the picture of a flower arrangement really tells us much about the cathedral, so if it stays, it should be in the gallery. Please remember that not everyone has broadband, and it would be a shame for them to miss out on this article because they don't want to download a dozen pictures. Thanks for all the hard work.
Blarneytherinosaur 08:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
Thanks for replying to my comment. The article is looking better now. All of the pictures seem to relate to the text around them, which is great. I agree that Broughton would better near the text about him, rather than in the gallery. Regarding the gallery, I'm not sure, but I assume that the pictures load faster because they are all reasonably small. (I haven't been able to find anything to back this view up, but it seems reasonable enought to me.) Also, using the gallery has tidied up the article a bit; it was looking a little cluttered. I can understand an artist/art historian liking lots of pictures, and I hope you'll allow a broadcaster to resort to cliché in agreeing. Pictures are worth a thousand words.
With the Fra Angelico article, I believe that Wikipedia used Britanica as a means to expand, when Wikipedia had many less contributors. However, if the text is not up to Wikipedia's standards, it is not up to Wikipedia's standards, Encyclopedia Britanica or not.
Blarneytherinosaur 00:49, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
P.S. The 'icons' you refer to on your userpage are called Userboxes. I've made a few myself. (I'm a little surprised you haven't heard of them; there has been a bit of controversy about whether we should have them here or not.) Blarneytherinosaur
License tagging for Image:Paris S Denis Fleur de Lys window 1986 crypt 1353 a a.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Paris S Denis Fleur de Lys window 1986 crypt 1353 a a.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:09, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Bossanyi
Hi Amandajm, coming back from vacation I found Your remarks. I am usually working on the German WP in my native language. There I am one of the main authors of the de:Lübeck article. Trying to write a social history of this city, I had to produce a lot of bios of people. As You can think, all German cities have a cultural history, which was sharply interrupted by the Third Reich. So I came to look on Bossanyi, but I have to admit, I am not a specialist on cathedral glass (I took the expression from the homepage of the Cathedral Glass Museum). I checked him on google, thought that if I made a "poor" translation of the German WP bio (which is from my hands too), as sources were available to me, and give some hints on his 2nd charrier in England, things might get going. The fountain in Bad Segeberg was added shortly after the start by another user. From Lübeck I know, that he learned working in glass with an experienced craftsman here. The tradition is old from gothic times, so he is certainly not an inventor, but in my opinion definitely one of the figures in the revival of this art in the 20th Century.
- Resuming: this guy still needs some work from the other side of the Channel...--Kresspahl 01:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Edinburgh Castle
Hi Rifleman!
I've just tracked you down as the person who made some edits and rearranged pics to Ediburgh Castle.
I've had nothing to do with the article previously, but I'm just about to do some serious fixing.
OK! The effects of your editting were as follows-
1. The previous editor had written things like "In the painting to the right, you will see blahdeblah and blahdeblah...." Where is the painting that this editor has referred to a couple of times? Not there any more! You have put in its place some photos, which do not tie up with the text, but you haven't altered the text, so that it matches the photos.
2. The text goes on something like, "In the painting, you can see the Half Moon Battery. When you go around this battery you get to bladeblah..." But you have moved the first reference to the Half Moon Battery, so that now the sentence that begins "when you go round this battery....." is left hanging! It is now totally meaningless!
3. You put up a picture of "HQ XYZ9953 episode 5" (or something). Don't presume that everyone that reads this site will understand what a string of initials and numbers mean. They don't. Please write the title of your pic in full, and also go back to the picture page you created and write a title under that too, so people actually know what they're looking at.
4. A basic rule of editting anything is to READ what people have written, inwardly digest and try to understand how sentences (and possibly even pictures) are connected to each other before you shove them some different place! That way, you avoid making total nonsense out of someone's perfectly good article!
5. I'm about to put back what you moved, sort out the grammar, put the picture in a place where it relates to the previous editor's comments and leave a more-or-less empty box where someone (possibly you) can write all that they know about the Military Tatoo. If you know anything about the regimental stuff, why don't you do that a bit more fully?
--Amandajm 11:40, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I made the edits in good faith. At least, that's the assumption you (and every other editor) is expected to make. If it bothers you that much, you can either revert it or edit it yourself. Why take it up with me now, 2 or 3 months later, after more than a dozen edits by other editors?
I'm sorry that shifting pictures around breaks links with the text. Bearing in mind that the relative positions between the text and the images are not fixed (not everyone uses the same browser; not every browser renders the same way), perhaps the text should refer to the pictures explicitly rather than implicitly.
I added a picture of Headquarters, 52nd Infantry Brigade. Using standardized, international abbreviations, it translates to HQ 52 Inf Bde. That's a standardized, international abbreviation. I apologize for assuming that this would be understandable to all, but let's not trivialize it as "HQ XYZ9953 episode 5" (or something) like you did. --Rifleman 82 13:17, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Disambiguation links
Fixing them is never done. Firstly because I usually get bored before I track them all down, secondly because people keep adding them. Endless hours of fun ! Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Reba Schappell in concert.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Reba Schappell in concert.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Stained Glass
I really appreciate it when someone corrects my spelling! No, what I mean precisely is- I really appreciate it when someone who knows when and when not to use double letters, and uses English spelling, corrects my spelling! You can follow me around from article to article, if you like! --Amandajm 12:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- I suppose some people in this world are brilliant scholars who can research topics and construct dynamic encyclopedic prose, waxing lyrical to engage the enthralled reader; others of us spend our time as nitpicking pedants, fussing over mundane matters of spelling rules and punctuation. It's a good job we are not all the same - it makes us learn to appreciate each other and work as a team. (sermon ends here ;-)
- Thanks for dropping a note on my page - it's nice to know I'm not offending people by pointing out their mistakes! Maybe I will follow you around with my pile of dictionaries when I have time ;-) Keep up your good work...
- Oh, and by the way, try turning your keyboard key-side downwards and banging it on the table a few times. You'll be surprised what a lot of accumulated gubbins comes out, and it might just stop the keyboard from its infurating habit of reppeeaatiinng letters...
- Euchiasmus 20:09, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I toook your advvice. Whatt's yourr next sugggestion.
--Amandajm 12:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- Sprinkle the gubbins back in; it was better as it was. Then you could employ a wikiliterate dictionarist as de-repetizer (who knows, I might even apply for the job... ;o) Euchiasmus 20:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Wollongong's phonetics
OK, I read the article's transcription, which is [wʊlɒŋgɒŋ]. I read up on the phonetics of Australian English to make sure we are on the same page. I'll assume you described it in Australian phonetics.
- The first syllable, [wʊl], has the same vowel as "foot." So I guess this is right.
- You are right about the vowel [ɒ] in the last two syllables (ong and gong), it doesn't even exist in Australian English. It's the "a" in the british prunounciation of "what." Originally, it was the vowel in words like "lot," "cloth," etc. but it changed into [ɔ].
- You said the first vowel is prunounced more like "en." Is it like the vowel in "dress" and "bed"? If it is, then the correct way to write that vowel is simply [en].
- I'm not quite sure what you mean by "Gong as in Order of Australia." Are you referring to the "or" in "order"? If so, then you'd write it as [ɡoŋ]. But if it's closer to the vowel in "goat," you'd write it as [ɡəʉŋ].
So you'd write it as [wʊl.en.ɡoŋ] (unless, of course, the vowels are different from what I described). The full-stops/periods seperate the vowels, you can remove them if you want.
Please tell me if you need any more help. It's a pleasure to work on phonetic transcription. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 14:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- Then based on your description, it's [wʊl.ɪn.ɡɔŋ] if you pronounce "en" like "in". If you pronounce the "en" in those words like "un," then it's [wʊl.ən.ɡɔŋ]. I don't know which way is the standard in Australia, but perhaps you do. By the way, I'm sorry I didn't understand the Australian cultural references....I try to be international in the way I do things, but there is some stuff that just goes over my head. Anyway, cheers, The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 21:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, I took your question to the Language reference desk in order to get a third opinion about the matter. It can be found here. I think the only dispute about the transcription is the vowels in the second and third syllables. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 13:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Paris S Denis Fleur de Lys window 1986 crypt 1353 a a.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Paris S Denis Fleur de Lys window 1986 crypt 1353 a a.JPG. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
If you took this picture yourself, it should not be "fair use". In this case, you should license your own image under a free license - edit the image description page, and add a license tag of your choice from this section. Kimchi.sg 03:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- If the windows were designed so recently, then the creator(s) of the designs still hold copyright over them. Never mind that lots of people photograph the windows without realising it. I've tagged it as {{art}}, an image of a copyrighted artwork used for critical commentary. Kimchi.sg 08:58, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Eucalyptus Photos
Thanks for the Eucalyptus regnans pictures you put up, they look great! --amRadioHed 20:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your support at [3]. I think that the picture is pretty much saved and no one is going to delete it (at least in the near future). --- Faisal 01:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
No problem!
Thanks, Gord! i'm hopeless at typos!
It's my pleasure. I'll line a bunch of 'em up against a wall and fire away. I found six "flyng"s out there, yours included.
Caknuck 07:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Looks good. The only thing is that Wikipedia is not an encylopedia in the traditional sense. I would be careful with combining too much information into one article. Any entry over 5 pages becomes unwieldy and should be split. While at the moment some of the entries may appear sparse, in my selection of entries I am banking on future additions.
You got some more work to do before these changes are acceptable though. Please wikify the links that were in the original entries and delete the information in the originals and re-direct the previous entries to queen bee, where the content now is located.
Shoefly 22:44, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Desg and Stained Glass Wiki page
User Desg seems determined to vandalise the Stained Glass page with repeated attempts to add links to his commercial pages. Twice he added his pedetrian church window amongst the images of outstanding examples of stained glass windows worldwide, and twice he added a link to his newly formed forum. I have removed these. What course of action is taken in such instances, if any? He has also REMOVED external links not belonging to him on other pages.
Australian blue cattle dog 01.jpg
I thought I should let you know that I'm editing Image:Australian blue cattle dog 01.JPG slightly, the colours are off so I'm adjusting them. I'm going to over-right the old version, because mine will be an improvement and there's no need for two identicle images if one is better. --Pharaoh Hound (talk) 23:25, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Art history
Sorry, I edited your user vs user talk page. Let me say again, I am open to criticism, and welcome your comments. However, by stating succinctly that art history is what it is, I don't believe I've given a narrow definition of it; in fact it's quite broad. The point is that it is a type of History. I clearly compared Art History to Criticism & Theory. The Art History article has just been restored. As for your comments on my user page, as I said, I'm not really sure I understand what you're talking about. I read all articles I edit. In fact, it was I who wrote the definition section in the article. Hope this clears up things. Incidentally, I believe people would in general appreciate you correcting excessive typos instead of simply apologizing for them.
Julie Martello 16:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Art history
Amanda: Thank you for your comments. See... Wikipedia is the most civil place. I'll keep on pluggin to make the article better. P.S. There may be a swtich somewhere on your computer to turn off repeats... I have forgotten the code... try the Microsoft website! Julie Julie Martello 16:45, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Heaton, Butler and Bayne
Hi, I think you may need to do some expansion on your Heaton, Butler and Bayne article. It seems a legitimate topic to me for sure, but it's so short right now that some people might be tempted to delete it again. Just add why they were notable, one or two references, and it should be fine. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Olympic_fireworks.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Olympic_fireworks.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Your edit
This edit, although hilarious, probably isn't appropriate, you should discuss edits of this nature with the user on his or her talk page in future. However, it is nice that someone appreciates my Banana GIF. Thanks, Dfrg.msc 1 . 2 . 3 09:05, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes. Please consult me next time. Good work though. Although many other users will not be so kind as me. It may lead to a block so dont touch other user pages. Culverin? Talk 06:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Wheres the beef. Culverin? Talk 05:22, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- No, I do think it was pretty funny. You should consider entering the Esperanza Caption Competition, down at the Coffee Lounge. I run it, so I'll tell you when it's on. Dfrg.msc 1 . 2 . 3
My Dog
Here is my dog Tom. He has destroyed so many of my socks. He hates my socks for some wacky reason. Culverin? Talk 07:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeh he is a bit large. I walk him every day but that still isnt enough for the bugger. His been though 4 pairs of my socks. He also ate my homework once. Culverin? Talk 09:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry. His one.
St Marys Singers
just curious as to what your links are to this building; why you feel the need to change things so extensively.
for reply please see St Mary's talk page.
--Amandajm 00:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
License tagging for Image:Archbishop Harry Goodhew.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Archbishop Harry Goodhew.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
merry thanksgiving
|
|
I wish you a very merry Thanksgiving! Hope you and your family have a magnificent day! So, what are you thankful for? Hooray and happy gormandiziŋ! --Randfan please talk talk to me! |
 |
- Have a great day! Please respond on my talk page (the red "fan" link in my signature). Cheers! :) —Randfan!!
Cheers! :) —Randfan!! has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!
Hi!
I just wanted to say: nice work on your articles. Now that you've entered Featured Article Candidate hell with Cathedral architecture of Western Europe, I hope the process doesn't discourage you. Wikipedia needs editors like you, who can add meaningfully to the encyclopedia. Good day, –Outriggr § 02:27, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sure thing! The references will help immensely. You will likely hear also that there are too many pictures; that all point-form sections need to be converted to prose; and, the writing will be examined rigorously. I'm not trying to discourage you now myself, nor be tongue-in-cheek (well, OK, maybe a little), but maybe there's a market in warning first-time FAC submitters about what to expect. :) –Outriggr § 03:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
- I understand. Good luck with your nomination! –Outriggr § 03:38, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Help for architectural stuff
Bye! How are you? If you've time, can I ask you to give a look to Basilica della Ghiara, Basilica di San Simpliciano, Basilica di Sant'Eustorgio and San Pietro in Gessate? As usual, I'm not so confident of my "Italianized" English and for architectural terminology... I made them some weeks ago but it seems that still nobody jumped on them and revised... Thanks in advance and good work!!
- Ah, thanks a lot for the edits!! Tell me when or if you will also correct the other ones! Bye. --Attilios 13:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Revenge of the User:Gracenotes
Thank you for the comments which you left on my talk page! It's quite possible that the corrections I suggested here were logically faulty rather than grammatically incorrect. Really, the only problem with the sentence I analyzed was that the subordinate clause was not set off by commas. After I deduced that, I went into grammar-correction overdrive.
I enjoy grammar (and diction) and its correct use. I correct my family way too much. It's quite possible that I made the neither/nor error for the same reason why a layperson may say, "That's between you and I." And I am aware that bands are singular, but a lot of people aren't. Also, "The United States has so much debt, they should look to the cows for help." Number and other sorts of agreement are confusing to many people. Thank goodness English doesn't have gender agreement with nouns.
"So-and-so amassed only a dearth of critical attention" doesn't work because dearth is too abstract. I intented "dearth" to mean "a small amount", when it's really "much less than a big amount." You're right about that: frankly, I was looking for some way to phrase the statement elegantly and was pressed for time, sort of like I have to go to my next class in... 1 minutes, 30 seconds.
Note that I love pedagogy. It's demagogy towards which I feel disdain. :) I know you don't need justification for my actions, but in addition to those I shall present to you a "Thank you."
Thank you!
Gracenotes T § 18:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Assistance for FAC removal
Do you want me to do this? I think all you have to do is to edit the list on the main page and archive the content of the FAC nomination sub-page. If you would like me to remove this nomination, please drop me a note on my talk page. TimVickers 20:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Done, I'd recommend Peer Review, many of "my" articles have benefited a great deal from outside viewpoints in this process. However, you have to be open to constructive criticism to get the most out of the process, and even when people misunderstand your writing their mistakes show you ambiguities and lack of clarity in the article.
Good work
I've just seen St. Mary Cathedral, Sydney, it looks a very good work. Just a note: my heart a bit cries to see that what, with all respect, is a fake-Gothic church has received such a good treatment here, with such an in-depth article, only because it's from an Ango-Saxon country, while so many true jewels of art in Italy (but also in France and Germany, from what I can see) remain hidden or confined in pathetic state wiki articles. Just to give an example, your article is comparable in size to that of [[Duomo di Milano]... And I'm too ignorant of architecture to produce more than the semi-stub stuff you've seen!! Be and continue with good work! --Attilios 12:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
So where have I been then?
I been nowhere. Jus' tryin' to lazily zap a few split infs, and spott a few doubble lettters...
Seriously, though, I have driven that AWB machine through your contributions a couple of times, but it didn't find much that needed correcting. I've been having fun lately with a website full of photos of UK (all Creative Commons licence) which I've been busily selecting, uploading and using to adorn some of the pages about English villages, stately homes, castles, railway stations and topographical features. It's at [[4]] - do you have anything like it over there? You can see a selection of the pictures I've uploaded on my uploaded images page.
Having done some work on the pages about such delightfully named places as Splott, Bonkle, Thwing, and Great Snoring it was good to be able to include a bit of colour on the pages.
I see you're continuing to do good work, and I hope you're enjoying it...
Cheers, Euchiasmus 22:09, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Mistake?
Hi Amandajm, I think you might have the wrong user. I have no present recollection of ever editing a page on Joan Plowright; I am not even sure who she is. Nonetheless, having looked at the history of her bio page, it seems my scrennname did edit something (on June 10), albeit at a time when I had no access to computers. Perhaps I left my SN logged in on someone else's computer, although I note that the only edit I can find has nothing to do with removing the word Lord from her title, and I really have no opinion on that one way or the other. Perhaps you are referring to something (or, perhaps more likely, someone) else. Cheers! Mjl0509 21:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I know right? Mjl0509 21:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
All right, maybe it's not a mistake. Maybe I did make that edit; I'm really not sure. At any rate, I certainly am not going to quarrel with you about it; you seem to be up on this stuff! On a side note, I'm very well aware of how to use the history and contribution features of Wikipedia, but thanks all the same.
Hi again; I apologize for the confusion. My official line (and the truth) is: I might have written that, possibly thinking it was a copy editing error. I am only to grateful for your guidance on the matter and am happy to defer to a more informed Wikipedian. My initial reaction stemmed from an inaccurate reading of the change and a (continuing) inability to remember making the change. Sincerely, Mjl0509 04:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Well, uh...keep on fighting the good fight? Mjl0509 16:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
It may be a good idea to consult on the talk page with the regular editors before making such drastic edits. Have you shecked the history file? Regards Giano 13:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- Amandajm, I'm afraid I have to revert you there. Please continue your good work on Cathedral architecture, but there are superior editors who watch after Renaissance architecture in the project. Best, Ghirla -трёп- 13:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the message on my talk page. It's a pity then that you left the remainder of the page in such an unsatisfactory condition, following the completion of your lead, and that subsequently your edits have left the article in such chaos that it appears a less than concrete jungle. Giano 18:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- Arrogance? - Your quote: "There might be more competent editors in this field than I am, working on that page, bbut i hhave seen no signs of them! " so I suggest you teach yourself some manners or stay off my talk page. Thank you Giano 22:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Never anything nice to say?
Hi, Amanda. Thank you for your contributions. Wikipedia is a friendly place, sometimes (for my own taste) even oppressive in its insistence on "wikilove" and on being nice. In view of this, I'm quite surprised that you find "you young men" never have anything nice to say, and that you encounter only arrogance. Have you searched your own manner of speech for possible explanation? I mean, if people are uncivil in speaking to you, and not in other contexts, there has to be some explanation. But in this case Giano may have been quite flattered by the "you young men"—an assumption or guess that you make about him and Ghirlandajo and their real-life identities. May I ask you to please not make any assumptions about me, by the way? In the first place, if you think in Internet clichés about such things, you'd be likely to be wrong. And secondly, many people prefer not to share or discuss age or gender or other personal details on the Internet (though you yourself don't seem to mind it). Best regards, Bishonen | talk 23:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC).
Arrogance?
- "...but there are superior editors who watch after Renaissance architecture in the project...". quotation from Ghirlandaio
This, Giano, Ghirlandaio and Bishonen, is what I am referring to as arrogance. The reversion to a previous state in such a way that new information is dispensed with, is also arrogance. The apparently well-intentioned crashing in to lecture on someone else's conduct of a discussion is also a form of arrogance, unless one is personally offended.
If the page on Renaissance architecture had been well written throughout, well organised, with pictures appropriately incorporated into the text, with quotations and acknowledgements where appropriate, with a reasonable sort of bibliography, then my editting would be a waste of time. I have no doubt there are many "superior editors" but in point of fact, none of them had done anything like a superior job on editting the page in question, in an overall manner that integrated the information. This is not to say that there was not valuable information in it or that there were not parts which were well written.
I've tried to incorporate all the points made by other editors and I hope I haven't omitted anything that anyone regards as important. The imformation mmay turn up in a different place, however. The sentence about the relation of anatomy to architecture, for example, is now under Alberti, the great Humanist theorist.
Concerning my rearrangement of leading pics, I wrote about that at length on the discussion page, and searched to find a juxtaposiition of two pictures that would achieve the same effect, but accurately, rather than using an imginary view which might lead to the impression that Alberti had actually based his design upon it.
There are a great many very obscure topics on Wikipedia which may or may not be used regularly by students. However, an article pertaining to a major aspect of a major artistic period is likely to be utilised by students in large numbers. It is a much more significant article in that sense than, say, White-tailed spider although you might not necessarily think so if one had crawled up your nose in the night, as they are rather prone to do. The point is, it needs to be an article that is well constructed and well sourced. It needs to be well written, because it will almost certainly be quoted in school projects. It needs to mention the key people and the key buildings. The sections about countries other than Italy need to be properly organised.
In other words, it needs to be the best, most consistent article that we can make it. I don't notice that it has any stars at the top. An article as significant as this topic, ought to have. But it is much easier to gain a star for an article that deals with just one aspect of a very large topic, one artist's biography, or one particular building.
When I've finished with the article, it is going to need very thorough spell-checking, typo corrrection, date-checking and link checking, not to mention the odd split infinitive. The Italian names need checking by an Italian speaker. Someone who really knows the subject needs to run over the specific references.
As for your comments, Bishonen, you are perfectly right, one should not assume anything about identities, unless the information is given out.
--Amandajm 01:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Renaissance architecture
Ciao!! I'm just surfing on your article and correcting here and there some typical typos and chaos from non-Italian source (why don't they simply copy-and-paste Italian names and fix the matter for eternity?). Yours is a good work, however I was maybe mumbling if you could also add something to specific entries of the architects cited. I also disagree on the addition of Raphael as architect: I did almost nothing in the field. Maybe you could add some other less known but good architect (I've no names in mind presently, but maybe you can help me)... Bye and thanks (PS: you're true: Ghirlandaio is really an arrogant guy from which little positive one can expect). --Attilios 12:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- As for the dates of life, if you surf WP:Style, I think somewhere is written that they are not neeed for people who have articles. If a user want to see them, needs only to click... Bye. --Attilios 12:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- I've found the truly missing guy!!! Andrea Palladio!! HE IS the most striking architect of Late (if not ALL) Renaissance. Don't know if you've meterial on him, maybe you could check his bio and the relative articles. Bye. --Attilios 12:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- You won't convince me... sorry! Why that article should be the only one to conform to this style in the whole Wikipedia (apart archaic shit from Catholic Encyclopedia?). Bye and check my edits... (PS: what's happenin' to your keyboard?). --Attilios 13:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- The book said "Tempietto" or "Tempio" Malatestiano? The second is correct (Wikipedia article is names that way, in fact). If the first, it would be really a ridiculous misunderstanding with Bramante's Tempietto. Bye... --Attilios 13:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- For Palazzo Te, see its article here. Note, Palazzo Tè is a wrong Italian form, meaning "Tea Palace"... instead "Te", without the apostrophy, was the name of an island near Mantua. As for the "Tempietto", as I wrote before, the mediocre source confused it with the Tempietto of San Pietro in Montorio (San Francesco it's a large church... I visited it in 1991). Bye (please leave it without date, consider that these are not standard written articles, but hyperlinked ones. So there's no need of dates). --Attilios 13:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- The book said "Tempietto" or "Tempio" Malatestiano? The second is correct (Wikipedia article is names that way, in fact). If the first, it would be really a ridiculous misunderstanding with Bramante's Tempietto. Bye... --Attilios 13:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- You won't convince me... sorry! Why that article should be the only one to conform to this style in the whole Wikipedia (apart archaic shit from Catholic Encyclopedia?). Bye and check my edits... (PS: what's happenin' to your keyboard?). --Attilios 13:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- I've found the truly missing guy!!! Andrea Palladio!! HE IS the most striking architect of Late (if not ALL) Renaissance. Don't know if you've meterial on him, maybe you could check his bio and the relative articles. Bye. --Attilios 12:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
rrenaissance archittecture
Heey Amandajjm, I notiiced the {{inuse}} ggo up aggain onn rennaissancce arrchiteccture, II like whhat I'vve sseen yoou do therre so far. Oone thing I'dd reccoommend is to usse ;section when yyou caan, to redduce thhe taable off conntents. Itt is ggood thhat yoou've foccussed onn thee inndivviduals. Aalso, itt wouuld bbe goodd too wrrite secttions abouut thhe abbstractions annd ideeas. Ssorry tto bothher yoou, DVD+ R/W 08:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC) No, I don't mean to. What I was trying to say in your amusing double letter writing is consider:
- Sangallo
instead of
===Sangallo===
for example, so the table of contents doesn't get too long. I don't know what you have planned, but your writing there looks good so far. I want to see what you produce. DVD+ R/W 09:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
ok, look at the version on es: (which is a FA)
2 Características generales de la Arquitectura del Renacimiento
- 2.1 Fundamentos generales del Renacimiento
- 2.2 La importancia de la perspectiva
- 2.3 La tratadística renacentista
- 2.3.1 Inspiración vitruviana
- 2.3.2 Los tratados y la posición social del arquitecto
those are the sections that this article needs now imo. In English of course. DVD+ R/W 00:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
hey what about perspective? that deserves 2 or 3¶ in this article. don't forget perspective - in all the depictions: drafting, drawing, painting, reliefs and so on. DVD+ R/W 08:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Tea Palace
"Palazzo Tè" (pron. TAEH or something similar) in Italian means literally "Tea Palace". "Palazzo Te" (pron. TEH) is another thing: you should know that apostrophies gives to Italian words different pronunciation and different meaning, a thing that even famous academics studying or writing about Italy seems to ignore. As for the dates, I still disagree with you; but you're doing a good work, and don't want to start an edit war with a good editor. Bye. --Attilios 14:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Matronaeum
Can you help with orphan matronaeum article? Ciao and again good work. --Attilios 15:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Also something for you (copyediting of my poor English), if you're interested: Certosa di Pavia. Bye and thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Attilios (talk • contribs) 23:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC).
A link
Reinessance - Polish Wikipedia method
Mayby You will be interested in way that We solve those problems on pl:Wikipedia.
- Article pl:Renesans (Reneissance) is general article about epoque
- Article pl:Architektura renesansu (Architecture of reinnesance) is general article about common things of architecture of epoque in whole Europe, about its history, genesis, and spreed.
- Evry notable coutry has its own article - look on table on ther begining of article about architecture - in yellow field links to reinessance architecture country by country (or region) (litteraly: ...in England, ...in France, ...in ...Netherlands, ...in Germany, ...in Poland, ...in Scandinavia, ...in Italy - yesm separate article, Italian reinnesance architecture deserved on it ;), ...in Central-East Europe. Last one uder free space is link to Manierist architecture). Every epoque or style, like pl:Modernizm (architektura) in pl:Wiki is solved this way.
Mayby this is the way that also en:Wiki will use? Greatings from Poland Radomil talk 12:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I moved it but didn't do the summary, kudos for that :) And kudos for Radomil for writing the article :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 16:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Page
They are ridiculous? Renaissance was something integrally Italian for two centuries, so what are they complain for? My advice is to leave things as they are now. When and if a consensus for moving material otherwhere will be reached, let's speak of it. Bye and thanks (PS: did you like Certosa di Pavia?) --Attilios 14:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- I wrote something a short sub-article on it, you can find at Todi. I've also just finished San Marco, Florence... if you've time, as usual my English need copyediting. --Attilios 15:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Italian people working for statal institution are mostly bored, frustrated and ignorant. --Attilios 15:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- I'm happy to see that Australian wine is good also... Bye! --Attilios 12:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. I visited it last year (I live in Rome). Particularly noticeable is the statue of the Saint by Stefano Maderno. I admit I didn't notice any matroneaum... The church and its cloister are delicious, but I remember that the storeys around were rather depressing... or maybe I felt this 'cause it was lunch time, and streets of Rome at that time become desert. --Attilios 13:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- Italian people working for statal institution are mostly bored, frustrated and ignorant. --Attilios 15:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Renaissance pages
Are you here yet? I just re-wrote Donatello and Basilica of St. Anthony of Padua. They need surely the usual language copyedit about art terminology and similar. Bye. --Attilios 13:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- Oh Ciao! Thanks for compliments: however remember that mine are mostly translations from Italian Wikipedia, although, of course, with additions from things I know, or have source in my library, when possible. Of mine I wrote mostly about singer-songwriters, history entries (History of Italy, Byzantine Empire, etc.), stuff about Rome and about condottieri. As for style stuff, I can't really stand people who writes bad! I like style. As for the poem, send me, I'll be pleased to read it! In exchange, I'll send you my shorts stories (I've translated a couple... I won a literary contest this year, I hope I'll ave truly a career as writer... who knows?). Bye and thanks (remember that Donatello is waiting for copyediting also. --Attilios 01:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Architecture bulletin
Hello and thanks for signing up to the architecture wikiproject. Here's the bulletin - if you don't like it just delete it from this page - otherwise it's updated 'on the fly' - I've added your name to the new participants. Regards --Mcginnly | Natter 13:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
![[3]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Muhammad-Letter-To-Heraclius.jpg){kind=link}
Renaissance
Hello, Amanda. I don´t get which picture you refer to, but I find fairly good the selection of images, specially those of Italian Renaissance. Nevertheless, if you refer to the picture of Seville Town Hall, it is out of focus, and shows a very partial view of Spanish Renaissance. A picture of El Escorial would be much better, (or maybe both). About Baroque, I didn´t answer to your message because that section improved a lot, incluing the title, and now it doesn´t lead to misunderstanding, as it did. Thank you for your good work!--Garcilaso 11:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hello again, the picture of Torre de Belem is great! it has good definition and all the decorations can be seen perfectly! Wikipedia has an article about Portuguese Renaissance, it is called Manueline. It was the main, and more develloped style of that times in Portugal, with delicious buildings like Mosteiro dos Jeronimos. Nevertheless, the strength of this mosty Gothic transicion style subdued other forms of more international Renaissance. Of course, there are examples, and I have found some of them while travelling, but I don´t know any especifical literature, perhaps because they don´t make a proper local style by themselves or perhaps in part because of the terrible Lisboa earthquake in 1755. [6][7]--Garcilaso 13:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
![[6]](http://portugalia.free.fr/distritos/jpg_pte/viana_castelo2.jpg){kind=link}
![[7]](http://img1.travelblog.org/Photos/11135/40968/t/217043-Sao-Roque-Church-0.jpg){kind=link}
Assessment team
So, in order to join the team, do I simply add my name to the short list of participants?
--Amandajm 01:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- yep - and get assessing - I usually start from Category:Unassessed Architecture articles. Happy hunting. --Mcginnly | Natter 09:18, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice
Thanks for the advice, but I was having trouble 'saving the text' and usually I am pretty careful about changes. And I would not make a change and list it as minor, so...something got lost in translation. As fas the number I am not sure what that is all about.Brosi 13:07, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Architectural history question
Thanks for the question. Well I had a quick glance at the 'art history and the 'history of art' pages and their discussions. Just my first impressions,.... but I think that it is a big mess. Basically the way I see it the 'history of art' emphasizes the objects where 'art history;' is about the discipline, i.e. what it means to be an art historian. I welcome the difference, but whereas the latter is relatively clearly established (it is about 150 years old), the former goes not only back to the caves, but also involves numerous methodological tangles and conflicts. Now to architecture. Basically, the way I see it, 'architectural history' as it is today is mainly about the objects - similar to the 'history of art' page. This is because there is no real discussion of how architectural historians work methodologically or of the different schools of opinion etc. (also to take into consideration is that many architectural historians are trained as art historians). If you or someone starts a 'history of architecture' page then one would have to work to make parallels (so I would think) with the existent art hitory pages..... Meaning, most of what is NOW in 'architectural history' would have to be retitled 'history of architecture'. 'Architectural history' would then be a page about architectural historians, etc. So you see the tangle. I would humbly think that the art history page should have been titled 'The history of art history' - the latter is a common phrase, I believe among art historians. But sounds odd to the lay person. I will have to think about it a bit more. But my first response is that this is quite a mess and that one should proceed cautiously.Brosi 02:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
ISBN, etc
No I definitely would never remove an ISBN. I havenl;t gone to the page you to check it out, but just to let you know. I think I see what you men with history of architectural history. something like comparative interpretations.Brosi 14:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
disappearing dates! solved - I hope
Dear Amandajm, I sent a note to the help desk of Wikipedia, but they did not solve it, but I think I finally figured it out. I use Firefox and the dates and ISBNs were all underlined in red. The Wikipedia people told me that that should not happen. I clicked on a date and was told that Firefox can dial the numbers. so somehow Firefox thinks these are phone numbers and for some reason though deletes them in Wikipedia. So I now use Netscape, and hopefully that solves it. I will keep my eyes open however. Thanks for your help on this.Brosi 21:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Billy Graham Crusade.jpg)
){kind=link}
Thanks for uploading Image:Billy Graham Crusade.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 17:51, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Renaissance and upward
Yes, the Renaisance architecture page is mostly Italian Renaisance. The way I see it, Renaissance should be very general like a disambiguation page, but with more meat. In other words, it should end after 'Other Renaissances' and that's it as it overlapps with 'ren. arch'. page. That page then should be 'Italian Ren. arch' with links etc. to the various 'European Renaissances. That would clean up the whole mess.
On the other note, I will try to put in more sources. Most of the stuff I put in was so obvious and uncontrovertial that I thought it did not need too much in the way of specific sources. But I can add that no problem.Brosi 19:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
More on Renaissance
Amandajm, I have been working some more on the ren. arch page, the beginning. Straightening out language etc. clarifying usage, and putting in sources - up to "characteristics..." that is. I will try to tackle that later. I think that 'charafteristics' is too long and goes over generic classical vocabulary. Better would be to show an early Renaissance use of these features. The 'Influences on the development..' part is not too bad, but could also be rearranged. One would probably want to start with commercial rather than religious, since the renaissance in Rome came after Florence etc.... and then on to Brunelleschi. I think on this page, B should be relative short since there is another Wiki page obvisouly. The Brunelleschi page needs then to be developed, or something could be brought over to that page. etc.... any way need to take a break- chao.Brosi 00:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
tips
I'm learning from the master. Went a bit overboard on the dates. I think it is looking good. Between the two of us we will get this down. Like the new "influences" too. Tried to put some the skills I am learning here to use on blobitechure which I worked on a bit last night too. I will try to turn my attention now I think to individual Renaissance buildings as you suggested. There should be a page -which is now still mssing - on Russian Renaissance, if that is the right title. A lot of Italian architects were brought up to work on the Kremlin churches etc. An often forgotten part of the Renaissance story. Maybe I will start there. By the way, sorry to bother you with a question about the "architecture portal". I signed up, (though I can;t find my name on the list), but what exactly does signing up mean? Is there a common talk page or something?Brosi 13:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
About the harbour Bridge
Thanks, the changes you asked about in relation to the SHB page were OK. Sorry I did not get back earlier, but I have not been here very often over the past several months. Arno 08:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
news from Brosi
Dear Amandajm, great news. Looks like we make a good team. I have been busy with Pazzi Chapel , Basilica di San Lorenzo di Firenze, Ospedale degli Innocenti; Santo Spirito di Firenze- on a Brunelleschi binge, I guess. Trying to tie it all together. Eventually I will try to upgrade F.B. biography page itself. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brosi (talk • contribs) 16:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC).
pazzi and F.B.
I follow your point, but I am using the latest sources, Battisti and Saalman, both the top scholars on Brunelleschi - whom I cite. Both argue that it is not a B. design - for slightly different reasons- and that at best he was involved only at the beginning. Battisti - I didn't put this in - thinks the building is basically a bad xerox copy of a Brunelleschi. "My assessment of the Pazzi Chapel is largely neagtive.." is how he concludes his essay. But this is probably because he does not like Michelozzo. I think the space is relatively successful for reasons which you outlined. but as to its attribution, alas...it is what the experts say.Brosi 01:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Maybe Palladio next
Well I think I got the basics down on Brunelleschi- redid his bio a bit. got some books coming that will help me some more on that. I think I might move on to Palladio and fill in some stuff there. Trying to get my confidence up on starting up something on the Russian Renaissance. Hope all is wellBrosi 00:21, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Queen mothers
I suggest that you look at the article. Every statement can be verified against the sources listed, including the Encyclopaedia Britannica; all of them clearly pass WP:RS.--Osidge 17:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
ren.arch.again
Dear Amandajm: I took the b.Fletcher part and expanded it to bring in noted Ren. examples. If you could look that over that would be great. Maybe other things come to mind. Sistine Chapel looking good! Maybe before Palladio I should do something on the Alberti buildings. The building you are talking about I think is San Sebastiano in Mantua. I see that it has no page yet.Brosi 14:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Renaissance Classicism??
I discovered this page Renaissance Classicism which is not very good - the first sentence in particular which is coped from
http://www.huntfor.com/arthistory/renaissance/highren.htm
which I also see is the source of some other interesting literary gems. 'climax' 'natural evolution' (ugh) and 'explosion'
"High Renaissance in Italy is the climax of Renaissance art, from 1500-1525. It is also considered as a sort of natural evolution of Italian Humanism. It has been characterized by explosion of creative genius."
Anyway, I don't think that we should link to the page, until it is improved, or is that bad politics?Brosi 15:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
One more change
Sorry-one more quick change I thought of. I split the "spread of the Ren' into two. so that it matches the chronology better, The italian stuff- about the courts I put before the High Renaissance, since it fits there better, and the Non-Italian spread, to france etc I then could treat as separate- wrote a brief intro for that, then everything seems to flow better. Hope that OK with you. Sweet dreamsBrosi 16:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
one more last change to 'spread of Ren'
Sorry-one more quick change I thought of. I split the "spread of the Ren' into two. so that it matches the chronology better, The italian stuff- about the courts I put before the High Renaissance, since it fits there better, and the Non-Italian spread, to france etc I then could treat as separate- wrote a brief intro for that, then everything seems to flow better. Hope that OK with you. Sweet dreamsBrosi 16:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Tiffany Glass
No objection to merging the articles from my end. The glass described is not a subset of Favrile glass. Favrile glass was not sheet glass, but a special finish in blown glass vessels. RogerJ 21:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
The name Favrile is a derivation of "handmade" and applies to his blown glass only. It is sometimes used for stained glass, incorrectly. Now that I think about it, I think all his blown glass was branded "Favrile" - iridescent or not. Most of it was iridescent, though.
RogerJ 02:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
True Cross
The early sections of this article are looking pretty good now! Thanks. Andrew Dalby 12:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
|
The Barnstar of High Culture | |
| message Attilios 13:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC) |
Just wrote Mauro Codussi, Villa Poiana, Santa Maria Formosa and Sant'Alvise. I'm trying to reduce the time spent here... but don't despair, I won't be able probably. --Attilios 13:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thanks for tip
Thanks-will put it to use. Which page was it by the way? I will try to get the Alberti buildings in order this next week. Got all the books now to work with.Brosi 14:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Re. Michelangelo!
about Michelangelo Hi Margrave! I thought that I'd reply here on your page. As politely as I can...
Please don't be anxious about people saying that Michelangelo was gay. There is a great deal of evidence to be weighed, and the heaviest evidence suggests that he probably did have male/male relationships.
Values were different.
Two mature men in a committed relationship was rare. Nowadays its common. For a married man to have a "boyfriend" in his late teens was common. Nowadays that is totally unacceptable for a married man, and if a man picks up youths behind his wife's back, she leaves him fast. (unless they have what is called an "understanding".) At that time, in the rather elite circles in which he moved with the Medici, as a youth, it was considered much more acceptable for an older man to have a young man as a "pet" or a sexual companion. This doesn't mean paedophilia that involved young children. And it also doesn't mean exclusive homosexuality. A man of wealth and status like Lorenzo had almost no choice about whether he would get married and have kids. Nowadays if a man picked up youths behind his wife's back it would be an absolute scandal. To accuse a man of doing that would indeed be libellous. But to say that there is a very good chance that Lorenzo Medici had sex with some of the young men that he kept around him, is simply a sign of the times in which they were living.
So, that deals with Michelangelo's youth.
As an older man he wrote a very large number of love sonnets. They were all directed to a younger man. But when they were translated, all the personal pronouns were changed to make it look as if he wrote them to a woman. But students of Michelangelo have known for years that he passionately expressed his love for a man. So, if we have fairly solid ground to believe that he was homosexual, what then? Had he been living in the 21st century, he simply would have set up house with his male lover, and everyone would know.
How should we react? Do we throw up our hands in horror because our idol is gay?
The situation nowadays in general, and certainly on this site, is that if you keep insisting that it is wrong to suggest a person might be gay, you will accused of prejudice, and perhaps rightly so.
If this genius, who gave so much to the world, was indeed homosexual, so what? In a world where thousands of artists of every type feel quite free to live homosexual lives, saying that Michelangelo is one of them is not a slander. It can only be a slander if you believe that to be homosexual is a really awful thing.
And I'm afraid that is discrimination.
Just in case you are wondering, I'm a straight grandmother.
--Amandajm 12:41, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Frist off all if you have a comment about what I stated, you should have placed it in the talk page of that article, and not upon my personal talk page. Second, it is slander to say with unfounded fact that Michelangelo is homosexual. I see a current trend that all historical figures especially the talented ones have somewhat magically been demeaned homosexual. Instead of these articles being fair they become a soap box for an underground agenda. You state "a youth, it was considered much more acceptable for an older man to have a young man as a "pet" or a sexual companion. This doesn't mean paedophilia that involved young children. " how can you say such with such honesty? You know better than that even with what goes on now. Then you said "In a world where thousands of artists of every type feel quite free to live homosexual lives" What do you mean by artist? There are few top draw artist after the 18th century. So if I can understand correctly discrimination is not allowed some people to rewrite history and force me to like it? Yes, A real encyclopedia would be 1st quality, aristocratic, learned, and not bias.--Margrave1206 19:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
From Alberti to Bramante
Well I went ahead with the Alberti, and got it pretty well organzied I think. Did a page of San Sebastiano in Mantua (just for you). I got to get some pictures.... Put in missing pages and revised etc. SO now, while I still have some time, I guess I will go to Bramante. It seems already in pretty good shape but some things could be added, starting with a list of his architectural works etc. I guess my goal is to get the 15c. material up-to-date with scholarship etc.Brosi 21:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Slander
Yes, with all the iniquities in the world a typo is the only thing that would completely distract those reading? I imagine only if they didn't have the compactly to comprehend whatsoever. However yes, it is slander to label Michelangelo in that poor and bias article. Wiki should not use historical people to further their agendas, or should I say the editors. However there is no point even speaking to some, for they cannot comprehend what is above them.
--Margrave1206 00:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Margrave!
The reason that I wrote to you on your user page is that you have accidentally made yourself look really stupid by what you wrote on the Michelangelo page. What you wrote is:-
"There is no POOF that M. was homosexual." And by leaving out the "R" you turned it into a joke that some people find quite hilarious.
Please go to the Michelangelo page. --Amandajm 23:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Personal attack
Deleted message Margrave, I wrote you here an explanatory message, which I have deleted.
The reason that I have deleted it is that I just read part of one of your previous postings, in which you describe the "Middle class" as boorish, ignorant and totally lacking in manners, among other things.
You are, yourself, (one is forced to presume) one of those boorish, ignorant, bad mannered Middle-Cass people. You make that clearly apparent in your posting. And also by the categories that you have chosen for yourself on your user page. Moreover, you don't seem to concern yourself with how many million other Middle Class citizens you insult.
I don't think that I should waste any more time here.
--Amandajm 02:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- Amandajm you keep posting on my personal page. Your tone is offensive,and truly there is no place for people of your standing on my page. Please read more of what I post. Also your general manners in the way you deal with anything on wiki is lacking. Where you reside is not the seat of Rennisance Europe, don't rewrtie history for your low agenda. I am not surprised about anything you do. Some have linage and others have to fabricate ancestry . --Margrave1206 15:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Again Michelangelo
Re your last message I am fully aware of the possibility that your Michelangelo posting may simply be a joke. However, as you know, one is obliged, on Wkipedia, to take others in good faith. ie. that you mean either what you say, (or what, despite typos, bad spelling, and bad grammar, you appear to be trying to say).
If, by chance, you are deliberately writing posts to create an impression, it is not quite fair to those who are obliged to deal with you in good faith. There are lots of places on the web where you can take the Micky out of people!
With regards to the content of your postings, there are two reasons why people express prejudice:- ignorance and arrogance. In all good faith, as a teacher, I am obliged to be infinitely patient with the simply ignorant. But when the ignorance is combined with arrogance, I suspect that it is incurable.
--Amandajm 23:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Wiki is an encyclopedia, not to be used by the lesser to further any agenda. I abhorred these bias articles in which historical people are used in a way to manipulate the uneducated public. Maybe you are unable to fathom the fact that the article and many others are in err? The only ones who "create an impression" or at least trying to, are those rewriting history. No one has the right to profane history with poor and unfounded facts. There was a time when some actually taught the truth, however one cannot live in the past. I find your general attitude and tone argumentative, though I cannot speak for others here. Implying my post are jokes is another tactic to dismiss my comments, or to lessen me. Everyone with a formal education shall not be forced into thinking as your, if this is haughty then so be it. Wiki is not a place to corrupt history with personal views or agendas. One has to questions your bias motives. I am not sure why you insist upon posting on my talk page, perhaps you should respond to the Michelagelo page.
- Nobility is forever, and even though quality is not what it once was one can always find it.--Margrave1206 06:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Leonardo
Are you re-writing the Leonardo article? Good luck. For some reason it attracts single-issue crusaders - Leo was gay, Leo lived on green beans, that sort of thing. Where's the Leo painted pictures? Anyway, I'll keep an eye on things and help out if I can. (Have a look at Caravaggio - a model of what an article on an artist should look like). PiCo 10:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I think what Leo needs is a complete top-to-bottom makeover - beginning with a new thinking through of the structure and content of the article. One possibility is to make it strictly chronological and treat of his achievements as we come to them - life and works combined. But that would still need a frame of some sort - a Background section describing the environment in which he worked (the new humanism, the new respect accorded individual artists, etc etc) - and a separate section on his contribution and legacy (sfumato, portraiture, whatever). And why he's so famous today - how he got famouser and famouser, until Marcel had to puncture the balloon. But we have to start with simply junking the existing article. There used to be a band of arts editors interested in this, but they dispersed some time ago, fed up with the steady deterioration of the artifcle - cfizart, Attilios, some others. PiCo 11:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
The Michelango-poof exchange is funny, but clearly not intentionally so :). You have Haidac on one side spreading the gospel, and Margrave on the other denying the undeniable. And me in the middle trying to offer a balanced view. It'll be a challenge on both Leo and Mick, trying to write something both honest and balanced. (Incidentally, have you heard of Mikelangelo and the Black Sea Gentlemen? They're a Sydney group with absolutely weird songs). Anyways, on Leo, I think what's needed is a complete re-write, not a mere editing of what's already there. Sorry, I have no books at all and can't help - except as an editor. PiCo 14:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Re- Positive
In the interests of positive and cheerful communication! The reason that I post messages that are directed to you in particular on your dicussion page must surely be obvious. I have explained most precisely why I posted on your personal page in the first place. It was out of kindness because your own posting about Michelangelo and the Poof had made you look quite ridiculous. Perhaps the word Poof has not yet filtered through the fog and ascended to the vocabularly of one with such rarefied ideals. Seriously now, the last person with whom I communicated on wikipedia who laid claim to such elite ideology and distinguished lineage called herself Lady Catherine de Burgh. But perhaps you never read anything as ultra middle class as Jane Austin. Those books show so little higher sensibility! They were the Mills and Boon of their day! --Amandajm 06:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Good Lord, are you are still obsessed with the typo? I must commend you on your diligent effort to diminish my words in such an immature way. Not only do you call me ridiculous, and ignorant to show your so called superiority, now you insult me under the guises of an apology. To even further a display of your level of enlightenment you now express kindness for those who are so uneducated not to agree with you. Is this how you debate, as the children you teach? It is best to debate an article as educated people do with historical facts and not fictions, lies, generalizations, insults, and subterfuge. I don't use subterfuge when debating, those that result to such usually know they are false to begin with. Stay on the topic, that should not be that difficult when you are able to. This discussion is not about Australia as a penal colony, exconvicts, grammar, or boorish manners. The discussion is about a quest to slander Michelangelo, without solid proof! The article is horrific enough, however to condemn Renaissance Europe is even worse. It seems you find delight in your pettiness, and mediocre insulates. Besides this you take a great deal of pride in dragging Michelangeo's name down. One must wonder why, is this all about uplifting yourself? Why is it that homosexuals deem to recruit the best and brightest of history, when there are other persons that they can rally around? You seem to take this subject very personally, perhaps to you it is more than an article but an expression of some sort. I am very sorry that you consider prejudice, ignorance, and arrogance attributes of those not completely compliant with your personal bias or preferences. If you are looking for role models you have Roman Caesars or someone more contemporary could be Gian Gastone de' Medici.
P.S. If you don't like my grievances about the validity of any article place it on the article page and not my personal talk page. I have made this request several times,don't post upon my talk page. If you dislike my comments about an article place it in the artilce page of that article!--Margrave1206 19:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
?
"Two Gentlemen of Firenze" Prego? Haiduc 03:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
leonardo
Site looks much better. I will try to get to it. but probably not for anothe few days, when I free up some time and have a chance to reread some books on L. All the best - chiao. In the process of arranging a trip to Ethiopia this spring and visit lalibela.Brosi 15:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Prose style
Amanda, please don't be offended if I offer gratuitous advice on prose style, but take a sentence like this: "Leonardo was born at 3 A.M. on a Saturday, April 15th, 1452, as recorded in the diary of his paternal Grandfather, Ser Antonio. His place of birth was Anciano, near Vinci in the rolling hills of the lower valley of the Arno River. The long stone cottage still stands in the midst of slopes covered with olive trees." It's long, discursive, and personal. It's the kind of thing you see in a book, when you have 50,000 words to play with and they're all your own. Wiki, unfortunately, isn't like that. A few thousand words is all you've got to shoehorn in Leo's life and works and an explanation of why he matters. So, do we really need to tell the reader that the hills are rolling and that the young Leo never lacked fresh olives? Try to keep to essentialls, and try to be impersonal. In this particluar sentence, I'd edit it dwn to: "Leonardo was born on April 15, 1452, in Anciano, a village near the town of Vinci in the lower valley of the Arno, within the territories of Florence." (Not sure that last point is true, but I want to identify the Florentine connection - imagine Leo's life if he'd been born in Calabria!) PiCo 02:19, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Give it the chop? No, I won't chop anything - I'll make suggestions, but any chopping is yours to do :). PiCo 02:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
You're welcome! I had decided to tidy the pages and links for all the Zechariahs in their various spellings, not realising it would take some 250 edits to finish the task... I just spotted a few more inconsistencies in this article and cleaned them up while I was there. Nice article, BTW.
Despite the question in your user page intro, I assume you have found WP:Userbox by now? Thanks for the code <br clear=all> which I copied from your user page -- just what I needed to start a new line at the end of my userboxes. Happy editing, Fayenatic london 16:00, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- San' Zaccaria, yes, I'd picked that up already using "What links here". However, I did find another one linking into that page from Poor Man's Bible, another of your projects! Fayenatic london 08:30, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Help in edit war
Can I ask your help in the poll to dirime this edit war at Castelseprio (see talk:Castelseprio)? I've stumbled in somebody with awful style layout, and probably one of those guys getting stuck like children in their version of any article. You must write support if you prefer my version. Bye and good work. --Attilios 09:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Castelseprio
Hello, yes, I think it's shaping up rather nicely! Your reorganization made a lot of sense. As it stands it's fast becoming the best source on the web outside of the Italian-language municipal site. Best, --Javits2000 13:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ciao, nonna! Thanks for work. However, I moved back the image you put in the centre to the left, just to introduce the main subject of interest of entry as soon as possible. What I think is that this is an encyclopedia, so, images in the centre create unpleasant blank spaces that you shouldn't find there. Bye and good work as usual. --Attilios 14:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please remain to a respectable layout in articles here. Of course it's better to see images as large as possible, but also giant blank spaces are horrendous. Good work. --Attilios 14:28, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Amanda, This is actually now getting less accurate. The layout is very easily understood with the Bognetti drawing in front of you, but very hard without that. I will rejig, and clarify the layout of the church in general - maybe not today. The articles are clearly going to have to be split, which was the consensus of the arts editors, which I will do sometime. Not my first choice, as you know, but there we go. Johnbod 18:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hi again. I've just seen your drawing, which is not right at all. Best let me do my changes & then discuss if you have questions. Johnbod 18:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Ciao!
Ciao, good work at Leonardo da Vinci. Can I ask you if you're also going to improve Verrocchio? It was rather poor if compared to my Britannica's entry, and to his importance. Let me know (by the way, you should check a better format for your "Section references"... see at WP:Style). Thanks for good work and best wishes to your grandchildren. --Attilios 19:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your help on 1st February. I'm a new contributor. Search for Robert Bolleurs on google; find priory-of-sion site for reference to TV documentary about The Holy Infants Embracing --Stephen-holmes, 12 February 2007
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Archbishop Mowll.jpg)
){kind=link}
Thanks for uploading Image:Archbishop Mowll.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 23:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Leonardo da Vinci
Just out of interest, why is a new page on Leonardo da Vinci needed? The Leonardo da Vinci - scientist and inventor seems redundant to me. Frickeg 05:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Right. Thanks. Frickeg 05:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- I added a hidden comment on the Leonardo da Vinci - scientist and inventor page to hopefully dissuade any tagging for deletion. I'm interested to see where you go with this. Regards, Flyguy649 16:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Leonardo
Amandajm. was a little busy with stuff so had to lay low. But to let you know I looked at Leonardo and I like the new additions, and contextualizations etc. I think I can add a little section or expand on his place in renaissance art etc. I thought the discussion of paintings should stick with chronological order and Mona Lisa should be put in its chronological place, toward that back of the list. to de-emphasize the fame mongering. I can also add something on centralzied churches and Leonardo - made some great and important drawings in that genre. Take CareBrosi 23:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ciao nonna! Mhmhm... it seems that you're too into Leonardo (your new article is very good, by the way) to occupy of the poor Andrea da Verrocchio. But maybe you'd have time to check my last Basilica di San Francesco, Arezzo and The History of the True Cross by Piero della Francesca contained there. Not to speak that also the latter's entry is very poor. Bye and good work. --Attilios 12:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello Amandajm, I have left a note on my talk page for you, thank you for your help with the jesse Hove photograph, have a safe journey and an enjoyable time, I will add to the jesse page as suggested, look forward to hearing from you again. Malcolmlow 13:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello Amanda I have made a mistake in the Tree of Jesse I added further information as you suggested and decided to use the reference section as you will see, but I appear to have cancelled out the existing references of yours, I am sorry and hope that you will be able to recover or amend the reference section. It is very obvious that I do not know what I am doing!! but willing to learn, with help Malcolmlow 10:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I'm glad we share an interest in such a facinating figure as da Vinci. I was not trying to water down the intro (the grammatical mistake I made was bad though), so much as to reduce the dehumanizing nature that the intro leaves on the reader. I think it's important to remind ourselves that da Vinci was a man with a clear historical context, not a complete anomaly. Was he incredible? Certainly, but we should not throw about ideas that he was the "greatest" of anything. I also was unsure of whether general statements like "of all time" are very encyclopedic. Lastly, he wrote of only two instances of his childhood, he surely remembered more. Melancholia i 07:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
New articles to be checked
Look Castel Sismondo and Portrait of Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta... need cleaning up of language, I think. Oh, if you won't soon tackle Piero della Francesca and Verrocchio under your quality embrace, you'll lose my Wiki-friendship!!!! (No, joking... but really hoping you'll improve them, they're to awful so far). Bye and good work. --Attilios 13:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Castelseprio
user:Johnbod tried a coup, moving, without any consensus, Castelseprio's city stuff to Castelseprio (commune). He of course took advantage of your legitimate idea to move the frescoes stuff to a separate page (ie. devoted to the church, or to the frescoes itself), to impose his personal (and, in mmy opinion, ridiculous view). Bye. --Attilios 01:53, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Sistine Chapel ceiling
Hi there Amandajm. I love your article on the Sistine Chapel ceiling, to my mind it's nearly an FA-standard article.
You, or perhaps I, may have misunderstood the assessement process - it's purpose is not to 'grade' articles to reward authors or even to give pointers for improvement (although this is sometimes done) - primarily it serves to lump all of the architecture articles into specific categories which can then be used to improve the articles - so, editors might have a look in and decide to pick one and improve it to GA/FA standard (A-class is mostly reserved for either demoted FA-class articles or imminent FAC candidates which have been peer reviewed at WP:ARCHPR - so it's not just one editor making the assessment, it can have some community involvement).
In grading articles which have an architectural component, I usually just consider how well the architectural aspects of the article have been dealt with. I have some logic for doing this on the basis that one of the FA criteria is that the article should be comprehensive. So it's quite possible that an article may have a different class grading depending on which wikiproject has graded it (doesn't the art wikiproject have an assessment department). Most articles are graded by WP:ARCHA as being just stub, start or B-class, GA-class and FA-class are automatically added when the article has successfully jumped through those hoops.
WP:FAC is a bit of a bear pit at the moment in my opinion where the insistence of conformity over 'style' has taken over from any kind of insistence on quality information or it's accurate verification. I do however assess articles according to the current defacto FAC standards - thorough in-line citations seem to be the flavour of the month, so when you quote data eg. The Sistine Chapel is 40.5 metres long and 14 metres wide. The ceiling is about 20 metres above the main floor of the chapel. with no source, this will doubtless be an issue for them. You might also get some flack for the galleried images, but for the life of me, I can't think of a more appropriate article to use them in. If you'd like it reassessing - put it on WP:ARCHPR, but as you say, it's an article about the painting and so you might be better off approaching the art wikiproject. Regards --Mcginnly | Natter 10:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Automated style-issues review
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
- Avoid including galleries in articles, as per Wikipedia:Galleries. Common solutions to this problem include moving the gallery to a separate page, like Gallery of Sistine Chapel ceiling.[?]
- There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
- Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -
between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 2 metres, use 2 metres, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 2 metres.[?] - Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), when doing conversions, please use standard abbreviations: for example, miles -> mi, kilometers squared -> km2, and pounds -> lb.[?]
- Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.[?]
- Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.[?]
- Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.[?]
- Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.[?]
- This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, than an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.[?]
- Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: meter (A) (British: metre), metre (B) (American: meter), recognise (B) (American: recognize), realise (B) (American: realize), grey (B) (American: gray), mold (A) (British: mould).
- Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
- Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “
Allpigs are pink, so we thought ofa number ofways to turn them green.” - Avoid misplaced formality: “in order to/for” (-> to/for), “thereupon”, “notwithstanding”, etc.
- Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “
- Avoid using contractions like (outside of quotations): Don't.
- As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]
- Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Mcginnly | Natter 10:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Palazzo del (?!?!) Te
I was asking you if you wanted to support move of Palazzo del Te to Palazzo Te here, of course if you agree. Also waiting to love you again once you'll work at Verrocchio and Piero (joking, of course). Bye and good work. --Attilios 23:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- It's the common problem of errors spreading from old-fashioned English sources. Ain't sure so much of the matter, but when ALL official sites of Manuta list it as Palazzo Te, a reason would be. Bye and good work at Piero della Francesca and Verrocchio. --Attilios 11:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, if you support the move, you can add support in the survey section of the talk page there. Bye. --Attilios 11:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Leonardo Da Vinci, Francesco Melzi, Michelangelo and Pederasty
I have my strong opinions, and I chose you for this question because of some prior edits of yours in the Leonardo article, though I am not sure who are the most respected editors on the topic. My position is that the evidence for any of these does not merit categorizing or even mentioning any of the three Italian names above as involved in pederasty. I have recently deleted such allusions in the Leonardo text. Is this the consensus opinion? CARAVAGGISTI 19:34, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Leonardo
The Leanardo article had a link blocked by the spam filters, but it was somewhat relavent, and i was unsure if it should or shouldnt be there; it was not because i am a new user (because im not). If i have time ill put the picture on the talk and see what people think.
Thanks for the response Urdna 23:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Crossings
Hi, Perhaps that was thoughtless of me, as I did not take your feelings into consideration when I made that edit. However, the material I inserted is also beyond dispute, and I was very disappointed that you upset the delicate balance we had achieved. I felt I had been extremely accommodating, and that you were taking advantage of the situation to have things completely your way. I will take another look to see what has been done now. Haiduc 12:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- The present incarnation of that section reads like a bad joke, but there is nothing I can do about it since there are three editors invested in heterosexualizing the man, even going to the length of sticking there a woman's portrait. So it goes, you are doing the children a real service, they can now run happily around the school yard calling each other faggot, with nary a danger of having their heroes tainted. Haiduc 21:44, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Your comments are emblematic of the negative, censorious mindset that first damns the man and then censors the article. You seem to miss the point that Leonardo's life is not about "having sex with underaged youths" but about loving. Having long term, life-long loving relationships with other males, finding them beautiful, putting up with their foibles, teaching them, receiving their devotion in return, making love with them when they were of an age for it (mind you that homosexual relationships in Italy today are legal between men and youths of fourteen and up, so that even in modern terms none of these youths were "underage", and in his days even less so as life was short and people lived quickly while they could and often married in their mid teens or even younger). So you have done it. You have projected every negative modern construct on Leonardo, showing what you really think of him and rationalizing your "defense" of him and of young people who should not be exposed to such nastiness. But I ask you, whose nastiness is it? Leonardo's or yours? Haiduc 23:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- I took another look at the article today, and wondered what the fuss was all about - by and large it was quite reasonably stated. So let me apologize for being heavy handed - one often writes things in the heat of passion which are later regretted. What criticisms I still have of the article I will state here. For one, I find the insertion of the woman's picture into the section on relationships to be both deceptive and dishonest. It seems intended to characterize as a lover of women a man who spent his affectional life among males. To anyone in the know it reads as a beard.
- Second, I find the description of his relations with his apprentices as "sexual" simplistic and prurient. What is important about these relationships is not what he may have done in bed, but that he was in love with these youths. An "ardentissimo e sviscerato amore," remember? That is a very beautiful and economical phrase which conveys much more than ever "sexual" will, and is, too boot, far more authentic since it was written by Melzi himself. If I might retranslate it here for you in terms which I could not introduce into an article, it reads as "an utterly incinerating and eviscerating love," a graphic description which evokes Leonardo tearing open his body to offer his beating heart to the boy. So I would suggest working that phrase in, in the English rendering I gave it in the "Relationships" article, and perhaps describing his interests as "erotic" instead of sexual. It fits the man better as it is a term implying greater complexity. My criticism of you all along has been that your approach is reductionistic and modernizing.
- Finally, and I do not expect this to fall on receptive ears, this section will not be complete until we make brief mention that such relationships were universal at the time (fulminations of some other editors arguing ab silentio notwithstanding). That casts his relations in a totally different light, much as we do not today presume to blame Solon for his affairs with boys.
- I am done with this, good luck. Haiduc 22:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Leonardo Article
Thank you for your note. Usually the only editing I can do is minor correction of spelling, punctuation, syntax, etc. Did I change a (correct) European spelling? The only possibility a quick look showed me was "pinion" for "pinnion," but I can't find the latter in a dictionary.
Regards, Omcnew
Congratulations on Leonardo
Congrats on your work on this article - at last I can actually erad about his paintings!
If you feel up for more, a next step could be a peer review, followed by featured article candidacy - but only if you want to go through more shot and shell. PiCo 06:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Len again
I've decided to call him Len - that's as in Len, Mick and Rafe.
Just deleted the addtion of this pestilential person who insists on adding L-as-vegetarian to the article. So bloody what! Maybe he picked his nose, too - should we add a para about Len as a famous nose-picker? Sheesh! I shall continue to police this one, as it really irritates me.
So, Beethoven's 7th? Consider the scene: a hospital maternity ward, doors open, nurse comes in with a baby, blast of trumpets, dah-dah-dah-daaaaaaaaaaaaah! "It's Mrs Beethoven's fifth!"
PiCo 12:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Sistine Chapel ceiling
Given your expansive and fundamental contributions, I was hoping that you would feel free to be more 'ruthless'. The material on Bertram's interpretation bears mention, but not as the sole or even most prominent reference to M's intellectual or philosophical being. Well done. JNW 16:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Enjoyed your thoughts on the S.C.c. talk page. Some years ago I wrote a paper on the ceiling, specifically the depictions of God, for which there had been no recent precedents (and despite what they may have borrowed from classical sources, there really had been nothing quite like them before, nor anything comparable since); I am encouraged to find my old references, which included mention of Neoplatonic and other artistic and philosophical influences, in addition to M's unique creative power, which allowed him to identify with the labors of the Almighty. All of which are most relevant, but not as sexy as other speculations, and therefore too easily overlooked. JNW 16:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I must dig up my old essay to remember the images I came across in my (limited) research, but I am interested to view the works you mention, and which I have not seen--your knowledge in the area supersedes mine. I am making a distinction between persons of the Trinity; I could not find any precursors to the terribilita (sp?) of Michelangelo's God, and certainly nothing that suggested His ability to move, nor anyone who had the audacity to depict him from different angles, even from beneath and behind. I thought that the depictions gibed with M's famous description of his own exertions as he painted the ceiling. What struck me also was the tremendous difference between M's vision and that of, say, Botticelli's God, represented on the walls of the Sistine. How much M's representations have stuck in the popular consciousness, and crystallized our image of an angry Patriarch--talk about mixed blessings. The paper was an essay for an art history class, and I never sought to publish it. If I find anything which I think is relevant and appropriate, I'll share it with you, maybe even add it to the article.
Thank you for your kind words. Maybe at some point I will drop a self portrait onto the page. Up to now I've resisted the temptation to link to a personal web site. JNW 12:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Wonderful, your insights into these depictions, and the speculation on possible models and inspirations! One of the elements that has always appealed to me in the works on the ceiling (and here I confess to never having been there, but relying only on books), is the perfect melding of abstract shapes in drawing, construction, and modeling of forms, abstract religious and philosophical concepts which remain open to interpretation, and a specificity in the portraits and figures which suggests the use of live models, and gives to these abstractions a powerful sense of reality. As a draftsman and painter, it is beyond my comprehension that his visual memory allowed for such a clear distillation of his earthbound observations, as well as such a focused series of epic content, up there on the scaffolding. Maybe it was this remove which allowed for something so divine.
Yesterday I did find my old notes, much of which were concerned with scholarly speculation on the philosophy and meaning behind the works. These included, among other things, the link to depictions of God from the antique, pagan sources, rather than recent Renaissance images, where God had tended to take a back seat to the cult of Mary; if memory serves, the Sistine Chapel was built in dedication to Mary. I need to sit down and really go through my notes, but I did have a blast doing the research some few years ago, because the various interpretations of the Creation frescoes were fascinating. One thing that impressed me (original research alert) was the view of God immersed in the act of creation (separation of earth from waters), his hand in front of his head so that his thumb actually blocks part of his visage: to me there was no clearer metaphor for the manual act of creativity, the connection between mind and hand is explicit. And who else would have dreamed up such a humanizing gesture for the Almighty? Anecdotally, one of my sources noted that the (Libyan?) Sybil was the same figure as that of the Doni Tondo, reversed. The Tondo, it continued, was the first time in Western art that the Madonna was shown with bare shoulders.
I might not get around to doing much on this for awhile, and sometimes my teaching and painting take me away from this for days. Also, I have my eye to making some contributions to a few other articles. But this is great fun to back-and-forth about, and I enjoy reading your thoughts. To be continued. JNW 15:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I think I read that in the later frescoes he often just painted the figures, without cartoons or much, if any, reference. Sheesh. I live in the U.S., and have only gotten overseas a few times, once to Florence, a town that defies adequate superlatives. For many years I resided in and around New York City, and practically lived at the Metropolitan Museum. JNW 01:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
I've sent an e-mail. Looking forward to hearing from you. Best, JNW 14:43, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Giotto
Youd be happy to notice that Giotto's biography on English Wikipedia enjoys now a decent status... guess who was the patient worker who did all the job? Can you give a check to correct my poor English, if you've time? Bye and good work. --Attilios 19:12, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Dear Amanda
It is a particularly ugly turn of events that you should choose to approach the article on Leonardo in this fashion, and that you should choose to use it as a vehicle to attack me by projecting your negative life experiences onto your image of who I am. We both have busy lives, I am sure, so I will make this as brief as possible.
Regarding the article, Leonardo appears to us as a man of great quality, both as artist and as lover (and I focus on "lover" because this article seems to have been put into the suite of articles addressing the sexuality of notable personages). Thus the obsessive fixation that many people have on "screwing" and "fucking" should, in my opinion, be set aside so that the individual qualities of Leonardo can be seen with a minimum of distortion. What comes across (and please tell me if you see the same thing or not) is the remarkable quality and endurance of his love and friendship for the two men in his life, a love that began when both were boys.
It is of no significance whether or not they had carnal relations, and we do not know the degree of physicality in these relations. What makes them pederastic is the combination of love and eros between man and youth, not what they may or not have done in bed, or who to whom. As for your professed uncertainty about Florence, as long as you and other editors refuse to consult current scholarship on the topic (namely Rocke, published by an obscure press that goes by the name of Oxford University) you will perforce remain in ignorance of the topic, not a good position from which to presume to edit articles on the subject.
You bring up the notion of "offending" people. I have difficulty with that argument, perhaps because it so popular these days, with the offended presumed to possess inalienable rights. But to me the "offended" argument seems to be nothing but an authoritarian foot stomp. Its essence is "I do not like what you are saying so shut up!" It has no place on Wikipedia as far as I can see, but perhaps someday it will. If that day is now, please advise me.
Allow me to suggest that the feeling of "offense" comes from the disturbance of the status quo by the offender and the projection of negative emotions by the offended (at least in this case). Only if we set emotion aside and deal with the facts on their face can we resolve that one. My purported "liking" for pederasty, your declared "opposition" to it are irrelevant, and nonsensical. Pederasty, like all else we idiot humans do, is neutral in whole, and good or bad only in the instance. I am not a "supporter" of pederasty. I am an opponent of its cover-up, demonization, or glorification. Now can we get back down to business? Haiduc 11:28, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your note, and your measured tone. The tradition of chaste pederasty is at the center of Plato's dialogue "Phaedrus", one of the fundamental texts of Greek pederasty, and also central to Middle Eastern pederastic philosophy and spirituality, to pick just two examples. Pederastic love is said to incorporate an erotic factor, whether or not sexually expressed, just like a woman's love for a man can incorporate an erotic factor, whether or not she ever goes to bed with him. I will not venture a guess on whether an adult male's love for a boy always has an erotic component, I simply do not know. As for chaste pedophilia, I would guess that Lewis Carroll is a good candidate for that role, maybe J. M. Barrie too.
- I do not edit here in the hope of sympathy, or enmity. I am frankly indifferent to that, and I think that anyone who approaches the work/play we do here with either of those emotions is making a mistake. There is a tremendous amount of freedom and wisdom here, and it comes precisely from the fact that we cannot indulge our personal monologue. It is irrelevant. Now if you want to talk about offence, that is the ultimate insult, and we are all offended in equal measure. Frankly I find it a very salutary kind of insult - leave your opinion at the door, and educate yourself if you want to contribute. Collaboration and collegiality - even in disagreement - are a different matter. I am not indifferent to them, and I welcome them whenever they happen.
- Coming now to Leonardo, we have a man who is considered by ancients and moderns alike to have had a passion for males, who were adolescents when he entered into relationship with them, in a pederastic milieu, with legal action against him for being suspected of relations with a teenage boy. There's a lot more, of course, but why need I repeat it here?
- The rub, of course, is your definition of pederasty. But this is an academic project, so we cannot base ourselves on legal terminology, or newspaper parlance, but must follow academic usage. And in academic usage, in sexology, history, philosophy and religion, pederasty need not be consummated to be pederasty. I am sorry if that upsets you and others. We have a perfectly good term to describe what you presumably have in mind. It is "child abuse." It is real, sad, criminal, and inexcusable. Pederasty can certainly be abusive - as can any erotic relationship. Leonardo's was not, as far as we know. Gian Gastone's probably were. Those are important distinctions, don't you think so? Haiduc 23:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Minor
Mhmhm... it seems you're again lazy to my requests!!! I will do Giusto de' Menabuoi when you'll made the promised Verrocchio!!! (Joking, of course). A note on Italian names: beware of accents when they are on last letter. Forlì is something greatly different from Forli without the accent. Bye and good work. --Attilios 21:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- As for the Sistine Chapel, I drew it from www.wga.hu, but I think it's has been mostly deleted. I had received an auth. from those guys, but it seems that they disagreed after I did it. By the way, uch to your delight, I've just brought to a decent level Andrea del Castagno. I like much your edits, but as for me I prefer to improve secondary and less-mainstream stuff, which is really bad here: I always make comparison with Britannica, and, for example, Sistine Chapel and Leonardo Da Vinci is many times better than them, while Verrocchio is ton times worse. Bye and good work. --Attilios 12:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- Of course, I was joking. Thank you for the "darling", dear nonna. but, please give a quick check to Giotto when you've time. Bye. --Attilios 13:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- OK, now you have to suppress those red links with critic infos on single works (if you can, of course... as for me, I don't have nor the info nor the language). Bye and nice dreams. --Attilios 17:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Of course, I was joking. Thank you for the "darling", dear nonna. but, please give a quick check to Giotto when you've time. Bye. --Attilios 13:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Giotto
Hi Amandajm: Hope you don't mind--I just made some copyedits to Giotto, minor tidying to follow-up on the strong contributions made by you and Attilios. I hope you will edit further. Best wishes, JNW 22:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Saw some of your recent edits here, and they looked great. Best regards, JNW 03:07, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- Wow! I must really compliment with you... it seems you don't relent until articles caught under your claws don't turn into something exceptional. Just a question: where that "Colle di Romagnano" comes from? I can't find a trace of it anywhere... Thank and again compliments. --Attilios 10:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Peter Jensen Image
Hi, you uploaded Image:Archbishop Peter Jensen.jpg. It says on the page that it has a CC licence but the Anglican media website does not have such a licence shown at the site http://your.sydneyanglicans.net/senior_clergy/archbishop_jensen/album/
Do you have a source for this licence?
--One Salient Oversight 14:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry to not have replied earlier - you posted a message on my userpage rather than my discussion page so I missed it. :)
- It seems that the image's copyright is not CC. That means it should be considered fair use. I'll make the required changes. --One Salient Oversight 14:32, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for talking about this issue. I've replied to your latest comments on my discussion page. --One Salient Oversight 10:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Help
ciao! Maybe you would like to clean up my last addition, Duomo di Cefalù. Bye and good work. --Attilios 12:11, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ciao carissima! Of course whatI wrote was temptative. I think, one had to consider also the structure of the annexed monastery (if one is there)... surely, the cathedral had also to resist to Saracen adn pirate attack. I think, one could write something to refer that it had also a "presence" function, as just a show of royal power. Let me know... and thank you. --Attilios 11:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Why I don't write
Hi Amanda. The reason I don't write is very simple: I have no books, and no access to books. So I go around correcting commas instead. Cheers :). PiCo 05:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Giotto looks pretty good to me - lots of meaty information, mixed with some well-selected appraisals. Have you had a look at Art of Australia? It could do with some attention, if you have the books (any decent library plus your local book-shop - do you have your own library at home?) PiCo 04:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I have no objection to the reference to Vasari staying, I simply thought the wittiness of the response was self-evident. One of those Oscar Wilde moments - Oscar: "I wish I'd said that." James Whistler: "You will, Oscar, you will!" Incidentally, what's the Whistler article look like? PiCo 06:43, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Fiddled with Giotto again - the word "however" should not normally begin a paragraph.
- However, there can be exceptions.
- As for the fat butcher, I lean towards the genuine bones theory myself - the chemical residues, the teeth, the neck damage, all sound very unlike a butcher and very like a painter. PiCo 07:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Dinner: fettucine, Italian sausages sliced up (after cooking of course), a tin of stewed tomatoes, a touch of tomato paste, maybe some spring onions, and a glass of red. Total cooking time: about 15 minutes. PiCo 07:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Re:Da Vinci's Religion
Ah, I see. Thanks for answering my question. I believe I read somewhere that he may have been into pagan religion, so I was wondering if that was true or just speculation. Chack Jadson 21:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Okay. Thanks for your help. :) Chack Jadson 14:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Architecture
Hi. I just want to say that I like where you are going with the article. I have pondered initiating a major re-write myself, but have been limited by real life and have managed to add very little. I urge you to maintain the distinction of the practice, business and science of architecture (as you seem to be doing), since there is always a tendency to view architecture as only a fine art. Keep up the good work. Mariokempes 03:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Sassetti Chapel
You'd be interested in this, I guess... As usual, your help for cleaning up language is needed. Let me know and thanks very much. --Attilios 14:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- OK!! No prob and sweet dreams from Attilio. --Attilios 15:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Re: Australian Italian
Well, Tuscans are known for being blunt, often even insolent :) Most English accents are perceived as cute (I suspect Sordi's voicing of Oliver Hardy has something to do with this), but I must confess I'm not very familiar with the Australian accents. However, hearing a foreigner speak in one of the Italian accents does feel quite disturbing: we've been taught for ages that our dialects are something to be ashamed of, and any Northern or Southern Italian accent is considered inelegant or funny (comedians often use them for comical purposes, for instance). Anyway, trying to guess where you're from by your accent is the one true national Italian sport; it's the first thing every true Italian (TM) does when he hears even just a little imperfection in your pronunciation. --Εξαίρετος (msg) 12:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Starchy edits
Not valiant, so much as annoyingly watchful. I wonder if Dan Quayle [8] is now editing. Keep up the great work! JNW 12:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Again me!
Ciao! Thanks a lot for your help... it seems you'd hate me, as now your help is needed with Prato Cathedral. But I'm sure the effort will be paid back from the pleasure to rad about such masterworks!!! Thank you very much and see you soon. --Attilios 18:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
A Friend
Message from a friemd: Time to archive this page, baby! Start out with a clean page, it'll load faster for all your friends.
Speaking of friends, have a look at the Donald Friend article - a little prose gem if I do say so. Why did I do it? Because I like the old devil. I have a photo of his house at Sanur somewhere, taken quite recently and without permission - hardly dare use it just in case I get sued. But nice to visit in the past. PiCo 09:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think I wrote the "quasi-abandoned" phrase. But I did write most of it. I came across DF when I was a discopntented teenager feeling suffocated because Fate caused me to be born in a small country town...and DF came the small country town just down the road. ("Just down" meaning about 200 miles - I mean Warialda. Of course, DF actually was a Sydney boy, with less connection with the family farm at Warialda than I had with Paris and Rome and all the places I'd much rather have been born...but I didn't know that at the time).
As for my pseudonym here, no, nothing to do with the name Pico - it's simply the first syllables of my first and last names, with a small alteration to the first - should be PhiCo, for Philip, but PiCo looks better. I'm a freelance journalist and photographer, based in Asia - hence the lack of access to books about Renaissance art (and any other bloody thing either). PiCo 03:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Roof
Hi Amanda, great user page. You have done a lot of hard work in a short time.
You said "they want info, but they want it from books." That's the problem, if for instance I quoted from some of my old textbooks, circa late 1950's I would be giving stuff that is hopelessly out of date. Things are changing all over, the building industry as much as any.
Even our Uni library is using 30 year old books to teach modern trade subjects.
Anyway I will persevere and try to bring a few references in, but I hate parroting someone else's words. The Internet is full of that already. Keep up the good work. billbeee 18:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Renaissance Painting
Hi, are you interested in collaborating in producing a good Renaissance painting article? It's scandalous that there isn't anything better yet. I've been meaning to do something about it, and you posted a message on Talk:Renaissance about it. I've got access to a (very) good university library, so if you need things sourced etc. I can help out. Cheers mais (talk) 13:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Hey, great stuff! I'll pitch in when you've made your initial edits. I'll also go and get a couple of books out to help reference stuff. Again, good work mais (talk) 13:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm studying history, hence all the interest. I study the Renaissance a bit, and I found the wikipedia article pretty lacking, so joined to improve it. Now I've got the bug! I actually find it very useful for revision though, so as long as I can stay focused to the right articles it should help with my degree. mais (talk) 14:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- When I've got some time, I'll go and get some books out to do some additional referencing. Great work though, you're filling a vital gap with 2 great articles! I'm not sure about the name of Italian Renaissance painting, development of themes though. mais (talk) 10:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Mqmpk. I am curious to know, since no comments were left, why this article was rated start class. Yes, it's a short article. There are not a lot of written resources about Wendy Richardson, playwright, and personal research is not permitted here. The article covers:
- Potted biography. Greater detail of her personal life are not necessary.
- How she began writing.
- Background to her major work Windy Gully .
- Where and when her plays were produced.
- How they were received
- What makes her plays good for performance.
- The scope of her work.
- Five quotations of what others have said about Richardson and what she says about herself.
- A list of her works and whether they have been published.
- Her awards.
- References are cited.
- Links work
- Pictures are good.
The article is grammatically correct, properly spelt, has been OK'd by Wendy for publication and is the envy of other local writers.
What more do you want from a short article?
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
--Amandajm 13:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi there
You can have a look at following for guidance :-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Quality_scale ( the example articles are great for sampling style and contents)
If you think the assessment rating is not accurate you can follow the process of requesting a new review assessment ( As mentioned in Frequently Asked questions section :)
cheers
--Mqmpk 17:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Help needed
I humbly ask again your help in copyediting my recent addition... Cremona Cathedral and Torrazzo di Cremona... if you've time. Thank you!! PS: good article that on Italian Renaissance painting. --Attilios 22:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Niccoline Chapel
Well! It seems we are missing a true masterwork here! So far it was not even mentioned in the Vatican Museum page!! I stumbled on it as trying to translate the articles about Fra Angelico frescoes, but in the end I decided it'd be better to have a generic page about the whole chapel. Do you have info about it? Ciao!! --Attilios 13:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)