User talk:VirtualDelight/TalkArchive2006
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 2006
This 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.
Contents |
[edit] Jews in Romania
( my message )
I sincerly apologize. My edit summary was induced by sarcasm, and never meant to actually imply that you would hold such views (just that there is the risk of the link being misinterpreted). On principle, I would only use the "niche in ecology" meaning only in reference to animal species or the human community as a whole, as it may otherwise be confusing. Here, the economic meaning was implied by the word "commercial" in front of "niches": although "niches" may still refer to livelihood in general in this context, the "niche in economy" meaning was probably the most specific one out there. Hope you did not take offence. Cheers. Dahn 18:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- ( my reply )
- Thank you, and happy editing to you too. See you around. Best, Dahn 19:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject Disambiguation Talk Request
This is a form message being sent to all WikiProject Disambiguation participants. I recently left a proposed banner idea on the WikiProject Disambiguation talk page and I would appreciate any input you could provide. Before it can be approved or denied, I would prefer a lot of feedback from multiple participants in the project. So if you have the time please join in the discussion to help improve the WikiProject. Keep up the good work in link repair and thanks for your time. Nehrams2020 22:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RfA thanks
 |
Please accept my thanks for your support in my successful RfA, which I was gratified to learn passed without opposition on October 25, 2006. I am looking forward to serving as an administrator and hope that I prove worthy of your trust. With my best wishes, --MCB 17:12, 26 October 2006 (UTC) |
[edit] Link to the History of Astrology page
I have no clue as to whether I'm responding in the right place, but someone named Virtual Delight recently chastised me for adding a link to the History of Astrology page.
Good God! Unbeknowst to me, someone else had years ago when contributing to the Hisotry of Astrology article added an external link to my article on the History of Astrology. I had no clue that it was somehow "bad form" to personally correct a link to an article I have written. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Anthony Pena (talk • contribs) 04:55, 12 November 2006.
- Added a headeline and answered at your talk.--VirtualDelight 10:28, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Just what is it?
Thank you VirtualDelight and Badlydrawnjeff for spotting and acting on the problem being created since August this year by ottex aka john Mchale Jnr.
This contributor has also been corrupting the page. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pop_art&oldid=87253424 since 09 August 2006
and the contribitions he has made to his father John McHales entry, created by a Piers Masterson on 10 August 2006. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_McHale_%28artist%29&oldid=87347055 makes interesting if laughable reading.
He has also made erroneous contibutions to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hamilton_%28artist%29
I draw these other problems to your attention as you guys seem to care that Wikipedia should not be used for the dissemination of personal opinion, personal promotion or for defamatory and libelous statements.There have been various recent press stories about Wikipedia being used for attempted character assassination and these "contributions" by McHale Jnr are indeed all of the above.
Thanks
Rory55 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rory55 (talk • contribs) 23:58, 12 November 2006.
- Answered at your talk page.--VirtualDelight 18:34, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for getting in touch with me and for taking an interest in the pages that I have drawn your attention to. It is frustrating to see that Wikipedia can be used by an individual to disseminate lies and to promote their own personal interest. John McHale Jr. aka.ottex has been promoting his father as the "father of pop art" since the middle of this year. An article containing an extended interview with him appeared on the site "Warholstars" run by Gary Commenas. Mr Commenas has recently agreed to publish an appology and a retraction. Some misguided critics have picked up on these ludicrous assertions of Mr McHale and have "run with them" so to speak. Legal proceedings may be pending. While McHale senior was indeed a member of the ICA. the IG and a member of group2 for the TiT exhibition, the claims made by his son are more than misguided and his comments regarding Richard Hamilton and the aquisition of McHales archives and intellectual property are libelous and defamatory. They can and may be proven to be so in a court of law backed up by the actual letters from McHale from the USA in 1956.
If you do continue to watch these sites I would suggest that they be reverted to a state before Mr McHale Jr began to propagate his lies.
The John Mc Hale entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McHale_%28artist%29 begins to become corrupted after Piersmastersons revision of 10 August 2006.
The Just what is it entry http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Just_What_Is_It_that_Makes_Today%27s_Homes_So_Different%2C_So_Appealing%3F&oldid=87117211 begins to become corrupted after 18 may 2006. With which you have been most helpfull in drawing to badlydrawnjeff's attention.
The very important page on Pop Art http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_art gets hit after jobjörn's entry of 24 June 2006.
The this is tomorrow page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=This_is_Tomorrow&oldid=87132608 began to have the false hoods inserted after Kelisi on 24 April 2006. Although the current revision by Phillip Spectre represents the facts accurately.
I do hope that you take a good look at the history on these pages and are able to see what has been occuring and how damaging it is to the true history of Pop Art and the reputation of Wikipedia. Also that you will be able to elevate these concerns to an administrative authority for further consideration.
Rory55—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rory55 (talk • contribs) 11:15, 14 November 2006.
- Answered at your talk page.--VirtualDelight 17:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] John McHale (artist)
Kudos for trying to keep the peace over there, and at the other articles related to this one. The editors concerned are the children of the two artists, and at least one of them has been in touch with OTRS with concerns that their side of the story is being erased by the other.
I've pointed the editor to WP:V and WP:RS and informed them that we can't accept original research, so hopefully they'll be encouraged to present their sources, if they have any. In the meantime I'll watch the articles myself to see if there's any more trouble. --bainer (talk) 02:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for your administrative intervention. I'm glad that a more experienced editor now is watching these articles, thank's again.--VirtualDelight 16:58, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] St Augustine & Whitchurch
( my message )
Hi, I'm afraid I don't know of the top of my head which st Augustine the church in Whitchurch is dedicated to - but I will try to drive past on my way home from work this evening & let you know (or add it to the article).— Rod talk 08:53, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] John McHale
Hi There
RE: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_McHale_%28artist%29&oldid=87784828
The two sections: After Major Pop Art Works and McHale's Pop Art work installed a the TIT both contain more spurious attempts by McHale Jr. to attribute the creation of the Pop art movement entirely to his father and to credit him as the prime mover behind the group2 contribution at the TiT exhibition in 1956.
McHale was present at the initial meetings and discussions of the group and made some contribution to the debate. Then, before the details were to be worked out he declared that he was leaving to study for a year at Yale and would only be able to communicate by letter. All of the design work and construction was performed by the remaining team members, Richard Hamilton and the architect John Voelcker with a great deal of help from their freinds.
McHale returned from America about 6 weeks before the exhibition opened and imediately set off on holiday with his family returning just in time form the final installation of the work which had been created by the other members of the "team".
The quote "A good deal of the visual material was supplied by John McHale when he returned from his year-long fellowship at Yale" has been taken out of contaxt from The Independent Group: Postwar Britain and the Aesthetics of Plenty; edited by David Robbins and does not support the claims following in the next section.
In fact: Frank Cordell was not involved in any way in supplying any of the items listed. Robby the robot was spotted by Richard Hamilton outside the cinema in Picadilly where Forbiden Planet was playing. It then was used at a cinema in Poplar when the film went on generel release and he negociated with the film company and collected the item in time for the exhibition. Guinness beer bottle was aquired by Hamilton again from the marketing dep't at Guinness in Park Royal London. Juke box was again located and acqured by Hamilton. Sunflowers was purchased at the National Gallery shop by Hamilton Rotoreliefs Hamilton borrowed them from Roland Penrose, photographed and printed them for the exhibition. The Op art panels were designed by Hamilton to fit the space and were made from asbestos sheet which was silk screen printed by him and his wife Terry in the front garden of their house in London.
If these sections contain so much erroneous information they should not be trusted and niether should the editors who submit it.
Thank you for keeping an eye on the pages. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_is_Tomorrow and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Just_What_Is_It_that_Makes_Today%27s_Homes_So_Different%2C_So_Appealing%3F&oldid=87117211
However if you go to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pop_art&oldid=89518278 you will see many more spurious references to John McHale too numerous to mention. If Wikipedia is to be taken seriously as a reference tool then something needs to be done to prevent people submitting edits to suit their own agenda.
All the best.
Rory55 13:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)Rory55
- Answered at your talk. --VirtualDelight 22:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Edit to Template:Infobox Musical
I am very sorry, but my cat jumpped on my laptop and deleted it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bluestars243 (talk • contribs) 01:16, 9 December 2006.
- Answered at your talk page. --VirtualDelight 08:04, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
