User talk:Ghirlandajo
ARCHIVES:
- User talk:Ghirlandajo/Winter 2005
- User talk:Ghirlandajo/Summer 2005
- User talk:Ghirlandajo/Autumn 2005
- User talk:Ghirlandajo/Christmas 2005
- User talk:Ghirlandajo/Winter 2006
- User talk:Ghirlandajo/Spring 2006
- User talk:Ghirlandajo/Summer 2006
After many hundred articles contributed to this project, I lost motivation to persevere with my active and time-consuming participation in this project. Due to the encouragement provided by other wikipedians, I still try to contribute new articles but not as often as I used to.
Holy crap!Holy crap, you've contributed exponentially! I envy you! Good work. Aaрон Кинни (t) 06:24, 8 July 2006 (UTC) on leavingTake it from me who's been living here in the West for ten years. They look and sound more menacing than they are. If you can, please don't become angry. You can keep any article you like for yourself, but not on Wikipedia. They do it to prevent a hierarchy from springing up. I'm not telling you to be awash wtih joy when your article becomes edited, but it wouldn't hurt to take a filosofskaja perspektiva on the thing. --VKokielov 17:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
DYK
Romanesque, Baroque...Quousque tandem, Ghirlandajo?Dear Ghirla... I think that there is a structural problem with our editions. I thank (again) your efforts and encourage you to continue with this project, I think that it is worthwhile. When I first heard about it, I felt so surprised and emotioned thinking in a free, universal Enciclopedia, at everybody´s hands, free and collaborative, I couldn´t resist to form part of it. I don´t know more of your leaving than the messages above, but think it twice. Now...I think part of the problem could be that we cannot think that the only valid point of view is ours. I know that you write a lot (A LOT) in this wikipedia, and it can be tiring to see that your editions are changed. If we change what we think is bad (or false, or incomplete...) somebody else can think that that was complete, or true or fine. THAT IS THE POINT FOR THE TALK PAGES. I say this for several editions and reversions you have just made because that was your point of view, without a simple word, as if you were tired of giving explanations to poor ignorants. Some of them have been already discussed, but now I find: 1- That the article you have made of Baroque Architecture is "untouchable": no word can be added or removed without a reversion. The only explanation is: "Garcilaso, please integrate your additions into Spanish Baroque and Spanish architecture; this article is just a brief overview; it cannot be endless)". Well, you may think that the article is perfect like that, but I think it is not. If it gives the only explanation of Churrigueresque as a superficial, decorative style for plain facades, the vission of the style is incomplete, and not "enciclopedian". After that briliant speech about facades, one can be mistaken. Not mentioning two important baroque spatial structures like Granada`s Charterhouse or Transparente from the Cathedral of Toledo is form my point of view, unwise for a general overview of the style. The same happens to the Madrid 17th century baroque. Who are you to decide about what is relevant or what is not more than other wikipedists? I told you once, and I implore again: Ask before deleting! 2-You didn´t even know about the existence of the First Romanesque and find yourself capable to decide WITHOUT discussing the fact, which is the correct name for the article. As you recognized, there are other wikipedian who know more about that subject. Some have participated in the discussion, and found that the best name for the article is First Romanesque. Please, please, ASK before deleting or moving, yours is not the only point of view in the world, and perhaps others have good documentation too, although their level of English could be worse. I again encourage you to continue with your valious apportations to this project, the only thing I want to transmit you is that listening and talking and improving a poor article is much better that the best of the editions if it is authoritarian, and collaterally, one could learn a lot!. Yours sincerely, До скорой встречи,Garcilaso 16:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Father ArsenyI was wanting to create a father arseny page but lack info. Please help. Thanks LoveMonkey 17:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
You are not to even think of leaving!I leave this site for five fucking minutes, and what do I return to? - Shock! I'm mortified you uncouth bastard Ghirla, you have used the "eff word" in public - what sort of dumb fucking bastard are you? Rude edit summaries too? - it's beyond belief - you should be flogged off the site while simultaneously being tarred and feathered. Well that all seems to have happened, so would you mind now returning so we can all get on with the project in hand, and in future remember some people have very middle class sensibilities and while you and I may periodically say to each other "your last edit was a load of fucking rubbish" some other people are of a little more delicate disposition. I'm glad to see Wetman has tried to talk common sense into you - (he could be forgiven, as the only gentleman on the site, for thinking he keeps some very strange company) - so come on get real and lets get on with it! Oh and if you are now seeing sense, could you please expand Alessio Tramello (no-one else, save Wetman, is likely to have the ability) as per request on my talk page as I have been skiving from a real life job to go and watch football, and now have to spend a few serious days in the real fucking world Giano | talk 20:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to see you go. This is a big loss to the English Wikipedia. Good luck with the Russian language version. 172 | Talk 06:00, 14 July 2006 (UTC) What a Delightful ContributionWhat a delightful contribution, Giano. I'm sure Ghirla will reconsider his thoughts on leaving, especially since you actually left your real life job momentarily, to go and watch football. Dr. Dan 22:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Your edit comment for undoing Kurt Leyman's edit on Winter War was "rvv", despite his edit comment and his entry on the Talk page. While I agree with your revision, I don't think Kurt's edit was vandalism. Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors. See Wikipedia:Assume good faith for the guidelines on this. -- JHunterJ 15:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
TerminalsDon't we all just love Nixer. I could explain him for the zillionth time that what he does in plain rude, but technically he is not violating anything. As long as he doesn't, I just don't want to waste my time on one letter discrepancy, moving stuff back and forth. In this context, it doesn't make one iota of a difference. Unless his moves interfere with work of other editors (and please let me know if they do), I abstain.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC) Lvov familyThanks for the reply. I was in Aleksin and Popovka yesterday. I now know that the last 2 sentences in that little section I wrote on the estate were rubbish. The house burnt down before WW2 having been used as a Dom Kulturi since the revolution. Are there any problems other than that? I think it would be a good idea to have some reference to the L'vov family's estate in Popovka on their page. I belive they were only there from the mid 19th century until the revolution but I still think it's relevant. There are various memorials to Georgi Evgenevich in both Aleksin and Popovka. Thanks again. Could you expand Caucasian Avars by translating above mentioned article? I would be very grateful. Regards, Luka Jačov 23:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Don't bother meAny time you revert without discussion I will be happy to re-revert you. Note that I did not re-revert Mikkalai's revert even though he made the exact same revert because he entered discussion on the talk page. --Ideogram 01:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Remember June 17th? Yes, that was when you had a row over the redirection/disambiguation page Oleg, had a row with Halibutt and supported me against a RUSSIAN user over Pyotr Leschenko. June 17th was also the day when Ideogram proposed to mediate between you and Suicup. [1] The same day, he was at the village pump asking whether sending e-mails to other guys someone had a tiff with before proposing that person for RfC, would be considered canvassing for votes. [2] (archive, so you'll have to search for "Ideogram") Three days later, he is at your talk page, threatening with ArbCom. When you take this off, he suggests an RfC on you at the Russo-Turkish War talk page. All of this within his first month at Wikipedia. And now the mediator is in a revert war with you over exactly the same matter! So, forget it, putting up a NPOV disputed tag over that section was the only thing to do.--Pan Gerwazy 12:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Manuel TolsáHi. That's not ridiculous at all, although I admit I should have cited a source for it. It's not my opinion, but an opinion expressed in several of my sources. (I'm not qualified to have an opinion on that question.) Here is one source: "It is one of the finest in America, and, according to [Alexander von] Humboldt, second only to the statue of Marcus Aurelius in Rome." [3] The original Humboldt quote is "M. Tolsa, professor of sculpture at Mexico, was even able to cast an equestrian statue of King Charles the Fourth; a work which, with the exception of the Marcus Aurelius at Rome, surpasses in beauty and purity of style everything which remains in this way in Europe."[4] I actually toned that statement down somewhat to allow for the passage of time, for one thing. Both of the statues mentioned in the quote are used as illustrations in the Wikipedia article Equestrian statue. Here is a quote from Frances Calderón de la Barca's Life in Mexico:
My intention was to show the level of artistic achievement in Mexico at the time. I think that is an important point to make. I plan to put the direct quote from Humboldt in the article. I don't see how there could be any objection to that. But please let me know what you think. Rbraunwa 17:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC) Hi. I put the Humboldt quote in the article. Thanks for adding the other image, by the way. Rbraunwa 06:09, 15 July 2006 (UTC) DYK, again
Image:Falconet - Pygmalion & Galatee (1763).jpgActually I do not know when the photo was taken. What it would be your advice? (meladina 13:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC))
AvarsThanks anyway. Did you translate the Avarian Khanate from Russian Wikipedia too? Two new articles came from this who couldnt be more satisfied. Luka Jačov 16:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC) Congress of Berlin POV problemsWe seem to be unable to agree on what to leave here, as I've changed it several times now only to have you revert it. Since continuing as we've been is pointless and fruitless, let's see if we can come to some sort of agreement about what to put in. The official name of the city on the Bosphorus has not been Constantinople for several hundred years, since the Ottoman takeover in 1453. It seems like a better idea to me to list the then-official name of the city rather than a Western name, but I am not hard set on that. However, I have a problem with the phrase "Bulgaria and several Orthodox Slavic states were precluded from gaining independence after centuries of the Muslim Ottoman yoke." The whole sentence reads as being negatively biased against Muslims and Ottomans, and positively biased towards the Orthodox Slavs. The word "yoke" in particular has only negative meanings in this context. While some may have/do consider the Ottoman rule of the Balkans to be oppressive, it is not the place of a neutral encyclopedia to decide whether or not it was oppressive. And finally, just to set the record straight, I am neither Turkish nor Muslim, nor do I have any feelings one way or the other about Turks or Muslims. My changes have not been nationalist, rather they are simply an attempt to keep the article neutral. Considering the anti-Muslim Ottoman and pro-Orthodox Slavic nature of this phrase, however, I can't help but wonder if you may have some bias yourself? I don't mean that as an insult, just an observation. I sincerely hope we can work this problem out to both of our satisfaction. Please feel free to post any comments on my talk page as well. Tev 23:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Dafni redirectHi Ghirlandajo, You changed the redirect of Dafni from the disambiguation page to the monastery page, stating that it caused the article to be orphaned. I don't understand this, as there would still be tonnes of links to the monastery page, especially from the World Heritage template you recently changed to reflect the move. The point of a disambiguation page is for people who type a subject into the search box. Preferably, no article should link to a disambiguation page, but directly link to the desired article. So the argument of changing a redirect due to orphaning reasons shouldn't occur. The links that now link to the Dafni redirect (since the exclusion of the world heritage areas) are mostly trying to link to one the towns. I would like to change it back, but would rather wait for your reply. Thanks --liquidGhoul 11:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Georgy Zhukov Mediation
OrenburgSchool project (or whatever that is) is back again, I would guess. I wonder if they are going to pillage articles on Russian cities every semester; it's getting quite tiring. I still have a backlog from previous occurences. I wish they at least answered any inquiries, but they never do, which is a pity. If we could show them how to do things right, they could be very useful. Anyway, I copyedited Orenburg, please feel free to review in case I missed anything.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 12:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC) AlexandrovWas it? I have nothing to look it up at this time. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:08, 21 July 2006 (UTC) DYK
You cited some academics in this article but it doesn't seem to show the source from which you pulled the information. Could you please add that while it's probably still fresh in your mind? gren グレン 07:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC) ДевятаевПривет! Как я выяснил, существует 2 статьи про одного моего земляка. Mikhail Devyatayev и Mikhail Petrovich Devyatayev. Нельзя ли привлечь общественнось к разарботке одной и наиболее полной статьи :) Кстати, среди жителей Казани Девятаев считается "сомнительным героем", т.к. как рассказывают, немцы после его побега провели децимацию узников лагеря... зато куда большей его заслугой считается тоЮ, что он испытывал и водил первыые в мире суда на подводных крыльях ("Ракеты"). --Untifler 14:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC) I inserted "Russian Tsardom" (the term found in "Muscovy" intro) to avoid the "Muscovy" reference, which sounds stupid in reference to this time period. Could you please split the Muscovy article to make a good reference to a period of Russian history after "великое княжество Московское" and before Russian Empire? Is there a good English term? `'mikka (t) 18:21, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
DYK
что значит by no means typical stalinist?Это как?! Этот стиль - не только высотки в Москве. Такое здание не могло быть построено до революции, ни в эпоху конструктивизма, ни тем более во времена хрущёвок/брежневок. Это типичный стиль сталинского периода. Почему ты думаешь иначе? ----Ъыь (mailbox) 11:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC) А это - тоже не сталинский стиль?! ----Ъыь (mailbox) 11:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank youThank you, Ghirlandajo for the explanation of the "peacock language". Now I really agree with you on that. And you really understand about styles of architecture. Drama of songs is when a poet becomes a playwriter and writes a play Juraune 11:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
DYK
Once again, thanks for the great article -- Samir धर्म 13:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC) It is not the first time I tell you this. You do not have any editorial control over the presentation or content of an article. This revert had no justification whatsoever. Circeus 15:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Invitation to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern OrthodoxyHi there! I've noticed that you've edited articles pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wanted to extend an invitation to you to join the WikiProject dedicated to organizing and improving articles on the subject, which can be found at: WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This WikiProject was begun because a need was perceived to raise the level of quality of articles on Wikipedia which deal with the Eastern Orthodox Church. You can find information on the project page about the WikiProject, as well as how to join and how to indicate that you are a member of the project. Additionally, you may be interested in helping out with our collaboration of the month. I hope you'll consider joining and thank you for your contributions thus far! —A.S. Damick talk contribs 18:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC) re:Template:Hero CitiesI'm not sure what is the problem with inclusion. I can see a potential case for not having it at all (that the link is rather coincidental and not necessarily worthy of a navigational template, but I doubt that'll be enough for TFD), but as long as the template exists, I am not sure what arguments can be proposed against its inclusion in Moscow or Kiev. Is there some potential PoV issue that I'm not seeing? I can see one or two ways the template can be refactored, though. Right now, I'm not sure why it should take as wide a space as it does, and the split by countries does not seem to be so relevant. After all, it is their status as Hero Cities that is outlined in the emplate, not their exact location ({{Metros in FSU}}, to take a random example, has no such split). Besides, if I am not mitaken, they were all part of the same political entity at the time they were awarded. Circeus 14:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
KolaRe this. "Of which it is now considered a suburb" implies that there is an official definition of a "suburb" (there is none in Russia). It also suggests that Kola is currently subordinated to Murmansk or is even a part of it, but in reality it is not directly subordinated to either Murmansk or to Murmansk Oblast. It is a raion-level town, the administrative center of its own Kolsky Raion. The fact is that Kola is located in the vicinity of Murmansk, and that Murmansk and Kola residents probably view Kola as a "suburb", because Kola was Murmansk's sattelite for so long. That, however, is just a colloquial expression. I am not convinced that such wording is better for encyclopedic purposes than my version. If you have any suggestions as to how to improve wording without losing essential information, I am quite open to hearing them. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
"Incompetent" move back to Pik Lenina
RE:CongratsHey. I wouldn't speak too soon. The Poles are pretty tenacious, and doubtless will campaign vigorously or find some device to get it moved to a Polonocentric name. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 14:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
I seem to have stumbled into a historical picture preferenceHi, I noticed your edit comments on the page for Nevsky Prospekt about the "superior" historical image that I replaced. I had not read the Nevsky Prospekt page prior to visiting today but was certainly surprised not to find a modern picture in place. I realized that I had a few, though they were certainly not the most stellar examples. I guess there's no reason to "orphan" one of the historical pictures, but I hope you aren't implying that there shouldn't be a picture there from the last hundred years! Maybe all three can be on there? (I only delinked the one because of the excess of pictures on the page!) If you have a better modern picture, that would also be fabulous. Let me know what you think InvictaHOG 16:02, 26 July 2006 (UTC) Ethnic slurGhirlandajo, I agree with you that there have been some problems from some members of the Polish Wikipedian community. However, I find this particular comment that you made about Poles being a type of "Holes", offensive [6]. Could I please ask you to reconsider your words, and remove the comment? --Elonka 17:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC) Hi Ghirlandajo, you have been active since the above request was made, but I see no reply here or on Elonka's talk page. Please respond as soon as possible, see WP:AN/I#Ethnic_slur for more on this subject. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 17:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Svetlogorsk photosЗдравствуй Гирландайо! Хочу спросить - чем тебе так понравились зимнее фотки летнего курорта? :) Речь идет о Светлогорске. Если кому интересно, на статье уже есть ссылка на Wikimedia Commons где старые фотки и другие (кстати я туда свои помещу чтобы потом на Русской и других уикипедиях разместить). Еще вопрос - почему ревертал последний параграф? Moonshiner 23:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Personal remarksThere is never a reason to make personal remarks about another editor, and nationality has nothing to do with editing. If you have a complaint about a specific editor's behavior, that's one thing, but there is no reason to refer to groups of editors by their nationality, as you did here. This is not the first time this has been a problem, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/AndriyK#Ghirlandajo_warned and Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Ghirlandajo. Thus, I am blocking you for 48 hours and warning you again to avoid personal remarks. Friday (talk) 17:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
S volkami zhit, po volchyi vyt. Protiv loma net priyoma esli net drugogo loma. Duraka rabota lyubit. Proletarii vseh stran soedinaites. Ili pan ili propal. Tolko blednolitsy mozhet tri raza nastupit na odni i te zhe grabli. That's all I can say in this respect. `'mikka (t) 22:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
comment{{unblock reviewed}}
See also the discussion on my talkpage. dab (ᛏ) 16:39, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Can someone tell me, or translate for me, the meaning (as a native speaker of English, I don't understand the remark), what the meaning of the phrase the Poles use us like holes is suppose to mean in English. It's seems pejorative on the surface, but I honestly don't understand its intent or what it is supposed to mean. Thanks, Dr. Dan 18:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
DYK reminderJust a friendly reminder to list DYK proposals at the bottom of the relevant date, rather than the top. BigHaz 22:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC) Alexander PalaceDear Ghirlandajo: It's Bob Atchison from the Alexander Palace Time Machine. I changed, corrected (we have redone many of the online books) and added some links on some of your pages that pertain to the Romanovs and the Alexander Palace, but you deleted them as spam. We have thousands of pages in our site - as you know - and Yahoo named it "Site of the Year" a few years back. Millions of people visit the site every year and our 20 online books are used by schools around the globe. Our discussion forum on Russian History has around 4,000 registered users and 200,000 postings in the 18 months. We are not trying to get more traffic via these links - we have lots already. I posted these from my IP - I didn't get an account until just now so that I could write you.
You may be interested in this addition, about which purported knyaz I have never heard. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC) Possible Molobo returnIt is a problem that I cannot use checkuser, as the logs do not go back far enough. Molobo's last edit was so long ago that I get no results, and have nothing to compare the current IPs to (even at Molobo's own request). The IP editor in question, however, is clearly a sockpuppet of someone, and someone who's been in the thick of it before. [8] Unfortunately, it's on many IPs, and so there's no easy solution. I suggest you go to WP:ANI and present the clear evidence that this is not a new user, but an abusive reincarnation of a probably banned user, and see if you can get some admins on his tail. Dmcdevit·t 17:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC) |
.jpg){kind=link}
