User talk:Giano II

Old messages are at

The 2007 Spumoni Arbcom campaign road-show will be visiting you shortly

Please leave new messages below:-

IRC

Have you got evidence to the contrary that I was on IRC at the time of making the "removing alisons edits" comment? --Ryan Postlethwaite 12:03, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You said here "That edit was made at 9 in the morning...... I certainly don't log into IRC for a quick 2 minutes before going to uni - so the publication of the IRC logs should certify this. I have my own mind Giano, so I think for myself - if I believe something needs acting upon, I act on it, if I don't, I leave it. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)" Now check the logs, perhaps you did log in and forgot about it. Giano 12:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you tell me how I could get them? I don't have a clue how I could. I'm positive I wasn't on IRC at that time. --Ryan Postlethwaite 12:22, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Passing IRC logs from one place to the other is frowned upon. Anyhow, you have no need to worry about it. I am withdrawing my questions to you, and launching my own campaign for the Arbcom. Giano 12:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NNDB

Giano (and anyone else who happens to drop by here), I would appreciate if you help Wikipedia be rid of this garbage. It is run by a company named Soylent Communications, and well you just need to look at that page to see why we should not be linking to anything they create, let alone having a template for it. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The world is coming to an end

But I find myself wholeheartedly agreeing with you on something. "Admins should be given a dedicated, exclusive to them, page to discuss business openly rather than in the secrecy of #admins." You're 100% right on that one (I assume that's what WP:AN was originally meant to be); I've never even applied for a password to #admins and don't intend to ever do so; if something's really so secret it can't be accessible to everyone, that's what email's for. Having never paid them the slightest notice I've no idea how arbcom elections work, but if I'm eligible to vote in them count me in. If nothing else it would make things interesting. — iridescent 00:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just make sure you have found out how to vote by the ned of the month. I shall need all the votes I can get! Giano 08:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was pleased, too, to see your name appear on the ArbCom election list. It will be intereseting to see how many other names go up before the nomination period ends. Hopefully not too many! Carcharoth 00:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More the merrier, I suppose. It is quite interesting answering the questions and far easier than I anticipated. I am just writing what I have been banging on about for years but in a more peaceful forum - far easier to understand what i'm saying there than in those long disjpointed threads on ANI. Giano 08:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is a very sound idea too, #admins is the worst possible system and not one I have any interest in using. Maybe even enough to convince me to !vote for you despite some other concerns I have about your suitability (not a surprise to you, I'm sure). Giano on ArbCom would certainly spice things up a bit, and not necessarily a bad thing. I shall be following your candidacy closely. Rockpocket 07:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Rockpocket, your votes would be most welcome. Giano 08:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You've got mine. Good answers to those questions, which I thought were remarkably good ones, too.--Wetman 08:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I can muster just ten votes all from highly respected and valuable editors like yourself, I will feel I have acheived something, and we are sending the right messages to those runing the place. Giano 08:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture article review

Hi Giano. Would you have time to have a look at Catherine de' Medici's building projects? It is an article on architectural history that I thought you might be interested in. I'm not the author (heaven forbid!) but I have been taking part in the peer review, and some advice is needed on whether the architectural terminology is up to scratch. Love the election picture up top! :-) Carcharoth 00:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As you know I am really tied up at the moment. I will take a look later, by the way - so I did not become totally transfixed and obsessed with arbcom questions I nominated a page for FAC to give me something else to think about. It's one you suggested I write once. Take a look. Giano 08:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

...but your recent article on the martin heifer is redundant, and has been since 2003. I've tagged your version for a merge, since some of your info isn't in the older article. DS 01:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problems but the existing page does need tp be moved from Freemartin to Free-martin heifer (currenly a re-direct to my version) or at least Freemartin heifer or few like me, will be able to find it in a hurry. Giano 07:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The word is also used metaphorically for non-cow organisms; as such, I feel that specifying "heifer" would be unwise. But your redirects are a good suggestion. DS 23:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I didn't know that. God knows how many years of keeping cows and one learns something new. Giano 23:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any job you haven't done? — iridescent 23:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a student I once carried bricks up a ladder, but never learnt to lay them. I have been a tour guide at the Uffizi and at the same time the sparring partner for a professional boxer who used to knock me out daily so the Uffizi sacked me because I looked like a criminal and frightened the Americans. There is not much I have not done. Gigolo quite appeals but age is against me. Giano 23:12, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the topic, but the term certainly got used a lot in the 1960s-70s wave of "Men are dying out and we're headed for a women-only society" disaster fiction. I don't think it was ever used in the daddy (or mummy, I guess) of them all Consider Her Ways, but certainly featured in a lot of the ripoffs. I think that it turns up in Brave New World as well (but don't quote me on that one as I haven't read it for 25 years). — iridescent 17:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are we talking of martin-heifers or gigolos? I'm confused. Giano 17:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would make a more amusing comedy narrative if it were gigolos. Since Wikipedia's main purpose these days seems no longer to be content-provision but a text version of World of Warcraft where different versions of The Truth™ battle for the amusement of outside observers, I guess we ought to stick with gigolos. It would certainly make the 70s trash-fiction more interesting ("an escaped Russian virus has turned 90% of the world's men into gigolos!"). — iridescent 17:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you again but I posted on the community discussion board and the administrators noticeboard and haven't received much response. I really would appreciate input to remove this website from Wikipedia here. It is run by purveyors of disgusting shock sites listed at Soylent Communications as a way of keeping tabs on their "dead pool" . Choice entries include "the most successful of their numerous experiments, Britney Spears was genetically engineered by the Disney Corporation to bring western culture to its knees" and for Keanu Reeves- "executive summary- dude" - yet according to one of the numerous apologists for this website that have all found there way to this tfd, it is a "fairly reliable source for information". Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 18:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gustav, I have absolutely no interest or knowledge of templates at all. To vote on the subject, much as I would like to help you, would be rather daft. I have no idea what I'm supposed to say. You may be right in what you say and someone with more knowledge of these things than me will probably want to follow your link. Giano 19:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Giano, sorry I should have elaborated. A template is something that allows putting an external link in a standardized format as in Alfred_Hitchcock#External links. In reality it encourages linking to whichever site the template is made for. People have been under the impression that NNDB is a reputable source, but as you will see if you look at Soylent Communications it is not and we should not be linking to it, nor having a template for it. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 21:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right... but Giano is a little busy, it looks like, Gustav.[1] It may not be a good day to introduce templates in his life. Bishonen | talk 21:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Yes I saw that and I wish Giano luck with it. I do however need some backup in the discussion as people who are probably connected to the site are collabarating to keep it- maybe you could help? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 21:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you're really out of luck, Gustav. See the fluboxes on my page.[2] [3]. :-( Bishonen | talk 21:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Well I'm not feeling too good either, but that website requires special attention if you can manage it. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 22:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help with an article on a historical scandal?

Could I ask for a favor? I did a quick Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment of an article on Sophia Magdalena of Denmark, a former Queen of Sweden, and said it was almost a B, suggesting better referencing, and expansion to more than the current article's focus on rather prurient rumors. The editor, very politely, said that those prurient rumors are really what she is most remembered for, and even asked if we should include a certain, very graphic, historical cartoon rather prominently featured on the Swedish Wikipedia article about her! Now I'm a proud, card-carrying member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography, but this is beyond my expertise. I would like to call in someone who has written a number of Wikipedia:Featured articles on historical personages who have had their share of scandal for advice. Could you (or any of the others with similar experience that I know watch this talk page) please weigh in on Talk:Sophia Magdalena of Denmark? Thanks. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 18:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well it looks as though history is taught in a very different way in Sweden to that taught by the Jesuits in Sicily. I've really no idea, and no none of my wiki-scandals have been quite like that. In my experience gutter gossip is always like that, look at the things said about the Queen of France at her trial, and Alexandra was supposed to have done amazing things with Rasputin. With slightly more creditability Marie of Romania was supposed to be not as pure as driven snow and as for the Duchess of Windsor and poor Diana, PoW well lets just not got there. However if these facts must be in the article then lets have them cited to a reputable book with the emphasis on reputable. Giano 18:44, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]