User talk:Wetman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This grackle has spotted you and is very pleased with your work! For having a thought provoking user page, filled with valuable instructions and examples that obviously show in the quality of your edits, I award you this Great-tailed Grackle! --User:Unfocused, 27 September 2005

To the most helpful, prolific and competent wikipedian I've met during my two years in the project. Presented by Ghirla ^-трёп- 17:51, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Archived:

User talk:Wetman/archive3Mar2004

User talk:Wetman/archive16Jun2004

User talk:Wetman/archive12Aug2004

User talk:Wetman/archive16Oct2004

User talk:Wetman/archive15Jan2005

User talk:Wetman/archive22Mar2005

User talk:Wetman/archive23Jun2005

User talk:Wetman/archive3Sep2005

User talk:Wetman/archive1Dec2005

User talk:Wetman/archive28Mar2006

User talk:Wetman/archive3July2006

User talk:Wetman/archive15Oct2006

User talk:Wetman/archive7Feb2007

The article on Wandering Jew has had some substantial changes made to it since you left a comment on the talk page under the heading of 'Sermonette". If you have the time, you might want to look over the current text and leave more comments for me on the Article Talk Page. I have an interest in the subject.Lisapollison 17:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Levée, was selected for DYK!

On various dates Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articles Levée, Acis and Galatea (mythology), Hubert Le Sueur, Ince and Mayhew, Bodmer Papyri, Vatican Mythographer, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 21:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Original research

I just saw your thoughts on original research and am feeling like tossing in my two cents worth {now worth 7 cents because of the price of gas}. I am constantly skirting the edges of OR and -we can be honest here, right? - sometimes cross over it. Take the Angel of Grief issue. In 1994 John Gary Brown published Soul in Stone: Cemetery Art from America's Heartland and on page 107 shows a monument with the caption stating that this is a copy of Story's Angel of Death located in the Cimitero degli Inglesi in Florence, Italy. I got the book as soon as it came out and soon there after wrote the author that the original work was in fact in the Protestent Cemetery in Rome, and not in Florence. A bit after that I got a letter from him thanking me and agreeing with me. This factoid is fairly easy to prove in other ways, but, if that were not the case, if this were a very obscure work of art, do I go with the published, but wrong version, or my own, OR version? A few pages later he shows a monument that I know to be based on Chauncey Ives statue of Undine, but only because ...... I am familiar with that work. Someday someone is going to do a complete OR evaluation of my postings and they will get ripped to shreads. I mention this because it has been on my mind and when I saw your posting, and since I feel pretty safe and comfortable discussing it with you, decided to send off this note. So . . how is YOUR comfort level now? Carptrash 19:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

My, but you're quick, Carptrash: I'm glad to be on your reading list. Where I've drawn on my own fifty years' reading, talking, listening and looking, I've been pulled up short by the public-school sophomores. I'd say, edit what you know is correct, it's the only intellectually honest route, and cross your bridges when you come to them. I've decided to take the other path, and begin with the references, working outwards. Or upwards is it?--Wetman 19:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, my wife says the same thing. Anyway I think it's moving ONWARDS. I have just recently figured out how to cite referneces using the >ref< thing and am frequently starting there too. I had a section on phallic architecture removed from the phallic article because I did n't have references. i wanted to say "Get a gripe on yourself ! Now look ----->at the picture I posted, then look ------> at that thing in your hand, then look ------> back at the picture. GET IT" But I didn't. But noticing that a building looks like a big dick is not exactly like adding a new electron to a hydrogen atom. I've got one going right now at Talk:2007 Catania football violence. I'm NOT asking you to comment there, I'm happy backing off, but, do you think what i posted is OR ? sigh. Carptrash 20:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Point 0f View

Good Wetman, Some worthy contributors threw me a stub Jean René Bazaine which I lighted with great satisfaction. It cured me of the New Year blues. It may also be a treat for history of art lovers scavengeing your talk page. I was able to dig up a fabulous (related) point of view by Fernand Leger on Picasso. However, in the lines quothing the POV -describing Leger's work on the stained glass windows at Audincourt, I may have used the word ambulatory incorrectly (there are pictures of Audincourt in external links). I am not that familiar with the appropriate architectural wording. The POV is great fun though. The w.c. also guided me into fabricating Marie-Alain Couturier, stylistically not one of my best (when was there ever) but as a move ONWARDS it can perhaps survive.

With grave thoughts on yourself and the usual Wild Bunch (including an inconspicuous Ghirlandajo) let me be allowed to remain,

as a friend (Lunarian 13:57, 10 February 2007 (UTC))

Moonman, I've made some tweaks, for your approval. Retrospective exhibition: is it an excyclopedia article or just a dictionary definition? Emile Mâle needs covering, even just with a translation from Wikipédie. I completed some names who aren't household words. Your use of "ambulatory" seems right on, but I smoothed the sheets a bit. A mint on your pillowcase-- Wetman 19:41, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

Retrospective exhibition, sounds like a Freudian slip...what with the Carp throwing his phallic trash around. No, but seriously who is the Wetman here, you or me. If its alive its an encyclopedia entry. If its dead, well...let's blow some life into it.

And believe it or not: there was actually -in real life, on my real pillowcase a real mint...

Thanks, Lunarian (forgot to sign in:(84.193.174.177 12:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)))

P.S. Freud, eat your heart out! ( I told Carp about 30 St Mary Axe smirky,smirky hèhhèhèhè)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks a lot for your contribution to Azzo VIII d'Este. Do you have infos also about Azzo VI and VII? and Jacopo and Marsilio da Carrara, perhaps? If you check my contribution page, you could find some other articles about Middle Age Italy maybe needing cleanup from you... if you've time. Ah, not last days, I get involved with some edit wars with several very poor-style guys, fortunately I won, as I tried to be reasonable, but it was too stressing to save time for add anything Wikipedically interesting. Bye and continue your good work. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Attilios (talk • contribs) 15:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC).

I came upon that interesting article while pursuing Charles II d'Anjou. Estensi are more interesting really. I'll have a look in my newly-open repertory, JSTOR: I find that, if I begin with a quote that succinctly states what I do know to be true, rather than beginning at my end with deathless prose, I avoid those tiresome and ignorant^{[citation needed]} stickers. Sorry to hear you're experiencing frictions. I tend to turn my back on bad behavior now: "The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit" is in essence a recipe for compromise with mediocrity, isn't it? It's a lot better already than it deserves to be, I find. --Wetman 15:46, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mayonnaise

This is a very late response to a message you left me last month:

Please read paragraphs all the way through before applying {{fact}] tags. If there is any step of the logic in the simple presentation of well-known historical facts that outlines the history of the origin of mayonnaise that is over your head, please present your personal confusion at Talk:Mayonnaise. Thank you. --Wetman 18:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

In fact, I had read the paragraph all the way through. The "sauce from Mahon" paragraph abruptly ended with the sentence "This often-repeated story seems flawed, however," with no further explanation. The next paragraph began by describing a different theory of the word's etymology. This read quite jarringly, and as I was in a hurry, I applied a {{fact}} tag. After reading your message, I found that the "seems flawed, however" comment was finally resolved with statements buried in the following paragraphs. That's anything but a "simple presentation of well-known historical facts." The paragraph has since been edited (by you, then others) to end "This often-repeated story seems flawed, however, for reasons given below," which is much better.

Even though I apparently misapplied the {{fact}} tag, the article was improved as a result of its brief inclusion. Self-righteous, arrogant, insulting comments like the one you left on my talk page help nobody and in the end will only drive well-meaning people away from Wikipedia. --Romanempire 11:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

(Ah, Gentle Reader, you must be wondering! Wetman had long since revised the sentence to read "This often-repeated story seems flawed, however, for reasons given below." This was intended to aid those, like Wetman's deeply wounded correspondent above, who struggle to retain a thought long enough to carry it from one paragraph, through a brief digression, on to the next. Perhaps Wetman finds those little tags more distasteful than most Wikipedians do: they are so often, as in this case, the leavings of an editor "in a hurry". --Wetman 12:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC))

You really are unbelievably arrogant. At the time I edited the paragraph, it ended with the sentence "This often, repeated story seems flawed, however," as can be seen here. Your clarifying addendum had been removed before my adding the {{fact}} tag. In fact, I cannot find a revision of the article containing the phrase "for reasons given below" going back to 1 December 2006. Why do you insist on repeatedly insulting my intelligence? Is it so hard to believe that your preciously watched mayonnaise article might have been, at the time, confusing in places? Why not focus on improving articles instead of callously writing off anyone who disagrees, even very slightly, as an imbecile? --Romanempire 19:48, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Venus Genetrix (sculpture)

Ah, good, I hope your expert eye would soon alight on here! :-) Two issues you might be able to help with re citations:

1. The Louvre site only says 'from paralleling with the image of Sabina', and not whether it's the coin or the statue where the term originated, or both. Both seem good candidates for me. Might you have a citation for which one it was (eg an RIC one for the coin?), or if it was both?

I think the parallel is with existing coinage. The other possibility is that there are examples of Venus Genetrix with the recognizable features of Sabina. This I don't know.--Wetman 15:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I've found the coin, and on looking again at the Louvre catalogue, I think it means comparison between the coin of Sabina and the statue of Sabina. Neddyseagoon - talk 15:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The Pio-Clementina sculpture has an 'associated' head of Sabina, based on the coin identification, which is mentioned as common knowledge in Cornelia G. Harcum, "A Statue of the Type Called the Venus Genetrix in the Royal Ontario Museum" American Journal of Archaeology 31.2 (April 1927, pp. 141-152) p 143, which also shows the photo illus. in the Wikipedia article, which is a bad copy of an illus. from E. Pottier and S. Reinach, La Nécropole de Myrina. Isn't that 1887 Waldstein article abysmal! --Wetman

1. Does the citation on the temple of Venus Genetrix give any link between this sculpture type and the cult statue in the temple? And if not, could we find a citation that does say why that link has been made and on the basis of what sources?

No. There has been no cult statue in the temple in modern times.--Wetman 15:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I know there hasn't. But we need to establish a link between Callimachus's statue and Arcesilas's statue - or rather if and why such a link has been made in the past. Does the AJA article you used not do that? Neddyseagoon - talk 15:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help (see also Venus of Arles and Tauride Venus). Neddyseagoon - talk 15:01, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Get the quotes from Pliny: he's on-line. See what he actually says. (I didn't do that.)--Wetman 15:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Was doing that as you answered! :-) See the more precise citation I've put in.Neddyseagoon - talk 15:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: The César Franck MySpace page link

Please do not remove this on the grounds of WP:EL. This page has information about and music by Franck. As WP:EL says, the officially sanctioned online site of a rock band has a direct and symmetric relationship to that rock band, and thus should be linked from the rock band's Wikipedia article. My Franck page fits this as closely as any deceased composer's page would. His music is all out of copyright, he has no official record label. Therefore, this is a page which should be linked to. --Vox Humana 8' 22:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

There are many frivolous external links, but that was an error on my part, for which I hope to be forgiven.--Wetman 22:17, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

That's fine. Thanks for the apology.--Vox Humana 8' 12:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Classical author portraits

Hi, Two things: 1) Other than the one from the Roman Virgil, do you know of any pics of classical author portraits (or later copies) on WP? Wanted for Evangelist portrait, and Author portrait which I am contemplating doing.

Interesting. Yes, the portrait bust of the classical poet was a genre firmly established in Hellenistic times, which Romans took up. Busts of Homer and Hesiod (recognizable types, but without historical validity, nts) adorned classical Roman libraries the way they decorated eighteenth and nineteenth-century bookcases. So there are "type-portraits" for Menander, even. The "Pseudo-Seneca" is now thought to be Hesiod, where there's a good illustration for your article. The Evangelists are present first in the form of their symbols, lion, ox, angel, eagle, are they not? Giving them individual identities in "portraits: a Renaissance idea? This I don't know. -Wetman 23:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmm - better read the article! I've just found 2 on Commons from the Vienna Dioscurides, but i think there are others.

Right! I was headed in another direction! --00:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

2) I saw from one of your articles that there was no Category:Iconography, which I have now set up, and am trying to populate. But there is very little suitable pagan stuff that I can find. any thoughts? Thanks Johnbod 23:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh yes, and thank you for noticing that: I was just hoping someone would help out... The pagan stuff is integrally built into the articles on each major figure. There's a haloed Apollo at Halo I'm especially fond of.--Wetman 23:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I've got halo in already, & will look round the major figures. Johnbod 00:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] St. Barnabas edits??

Wetman, what was the point of adding the obvious vandalism to Barnabas: "St Barnabas lived in Cyprus for 2 years with his beloved friend Dr Dan(Dr Daniel Stollenwerk)." You seem like a serious wikipedian, so I am confused why you would make such an edit.

So am I. That was precisely the edit I was trying to erase. --Wetman 14:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. It was rather confusing!Argos'Dad 16:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Wetman, don't worry about it -- the same thing has happened to everyone who reverts vandalism at one time or another. -- Pastordavid 16:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Links

You've recently passed through a number of Ancient Near East articles, deleting professional information as "bad links". What is your issue here?

You mean the links to the horrible Tripod pages which add little information, are full of ads, and fail WP:EL standards? That "professional information"? What profession would that be? --Calton | Talk 14:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Rather than fruitlessly argue, Wetman inserted the following perfectly neutral notice at the Talkpages in question, to let readers judge for themselves:

"External link or links have recently been deleted by User:Calton as "horrible Tripod pages which add little information, are full of ads, and fail WP:EL standards." No better external links were substituted. Readers may like to judge these deleted links for themselves, by opening Page history. --Wetman 15:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)"

[edit] Sense of humour, (and incidentally, truth)

Thanks for your message. I laughed out loud at that. The person who directed me to your userpage and I were standing at the computer together laughing at some of the clever and pointed prose on your userpage. Actually I haven't read it all yet but look forward to doing so -- and discussing some of the related points with you!

Incidentally, I'm trying to insert "merely" into the Wikipedia:Attribution policy to make it "not merely whether it is true", to combat those who insist that Wikipedia policy supports or even requires that Wikipedian editors knowingly insert or leave in false statements in Wikipedia articles. I'm not sure whether you agree with me on that particular edit or not but your userpage suggests you're interested in that sort of thing. See Wikipedia talk:Attribution#Role of truth. --Coppertwig 20:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Re Paris, France: Again, laughed out loud. I think there's also a Paris, Ontario (and an Ottawa, Kansas). London, Ontario is occasionally referred to simply as London, if the relative proximities are favourable. In French, there's no problem: Londres is in (um, the UK or whatever they call that country now), while London is in Ontario.

And Valence, Drôme. How could I forget Valence, Drôme, after I timestakingly disambiguated it from electron states and other, smaller places in France named Valence? I wonder what department Paris is in. --Coppertwig 03:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of humour, check this out: Uncyclopedia:Attribution --Coppertwig 18:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

What? There's some funny business going on: I thought this was Uncyclopedia. Have 39,563 edits been in vain?--Wetman 18:21, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bastards

I've just written this stub Bastard brothers following a request - I may have been a little POV, would you cast your eye over it for me and/or see what Mr Colvin has to say on the subject. Thanks Giano 10:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I gave it a tweak with Colvin in the other hand... and added the Dashwood connection. A nice feeling to be back to normal, Giano.--Wetman 14:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Very nice indeed [1] - i shall go and add a link to the masoleum secrion at West Wycombe Park - I dodn't know that. Thanks Giano 15:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I was going to add a few spontaneous words aboyt the architecture at Hestercombe House which is listed on DYK, then I ded a little research [2] and decided to leave it to you! Giano 16:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I've just found another brother Benjamin - Could you be very kind and see if Colvin give any dates, or further information for him? - I found him in Pevsner's Dorset - looking at Sherborne House - i wonder if he was not the better architect of the three? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Giano II (talk • contribs) 15:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC).

I'll put the Colvin ref. into the article. Would Bastard family be a better title? Giano, Colvin consistently calls Sherborne House "Sherborne Castle" though it looks most uncastellar. (There's an unrelated Sherborne House in Glocs., too.) --Wetman 16:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I know Sherborne castle well in RL, completely different place (Shernorne castle is a much rebuilt country house with castle like pretentions), I am confused though that in my Pevsner's Dorset he does not mention Sherborne House, but I found the image of Sherborne House on our very own Sherborne page -I'll do some further re-search - at the moment I suppose they are still Bastard brothers - I don't see the point of giving Benjamin his own stubby little page, but if any more turn up I suppose a page move is inevitable Giano 17:14, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Know it is definitly there or in a village nearby Newland, [3] I just cannot inderstand why Pevsner does not mention it - I must be missing something. Giano 17:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Solved it! I had aleady mentione it in the page by another name "In 1931 the (Shernorne) House was first leased and then sold to Dorset County Council and became the home of Lord Digby's School in 1932. Following the 1944 Education Act it became a Girls' Grammar School and remained at the House until it closed in 1992" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Giano II (talk • contribs) 17:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC).

Colvin does make Benjamin the nephew of the brothers John and William, I surmise as the son of Thomas (†1720); Benjamin was apprenticed in 1718, and by c. 1725 would have been in a position to contract for Sherborne House. --Wetman 18:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Pevsner (Dorset P 383) says Benjamin was the brother og the BBs, but I think Colvin is probably the most reliable source so Benjamin Bastard (I bet he suffered at school) now has his own page, but I thik I wil put a note in to say there is a difference of opinion - I always feel Pevsner is like a much loved great grand uncle - who though wise can be a little absent minded and wwanfering off at tangents - I don't know who else would know, such an obscure fact. Giano 11:26, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rawlinson Excidium Troie

Wetman, thank you for writing this article. I'd never heard of this manuscript before, and thanks to your succinct and informative article, I've learned something new. --Akhilleus (talk) 15:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I stumbled upon a reference to it and thought I should look into it. Thanks!--Wetman 17:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding your reversion ...

... at Wikipedia:Attribution. Please see discussion at WP:ATT/FAQ. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 20:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Want to laugh?

This thread just may appeal to your sense of humour, it certainly has mine, the first and very last time I join an "improvement drive" [4] Still choaking as I go to bed. Giano 23:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I never thought you hung out with those bumper-sticker people, Giano! Those "improvement drives" where people pass through, labeling articles' talkpages "Class: Start" and the like... The idea of "balancing" articles by removing material has never struck me as a real step forward. The fundamental problem is that an article Castle, which covers Japan as well as the Hudson River Valley, is never going to be very deep, whereas Motte-and-bailey or donjon for instance might well add up to something in time, given some careful Gianifattura. --Wetman 03:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• I was going to add "and now somebody with an Italian sounding name has removed the German Castle placed by someone with a German sounding name which replaced the Mexican castle and replace it with a Scottish one". (I had already removed the Japanes castle!). No, I can quite see why the castle mania sent poor Ludwig mad. I'll find a page of my own to write. Just after my time alone in Monte I wanted some company. I found it! Giano 07:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Once upon a time......

I came across your userpage a few weeks ago and loved it. So I started looking at your user contributions to see what you'd been up to (I'm not wikistalking you, honest. Well, OK, maybe just a teensy weensy little bit), and from these I've built up a mental picture of Wetman. Here's what I think :

• Wetman lives in a high-ceilinged apartment overlooking Central Park. It is elegantly but austerely furnished. The walls of his study are lined with floor-to-ceiling library shelves, filled with obscure tomes on Greek mythological figures and the lives of Catholic saints. He has a faithful man-servant, Collingwood, who feeds the tropical fish in the 12-foot long aquarium in the centre of the room on the dot of eight every morning. Wetman likes to watch his fish as they go about their piscine business. It gives him a sense of calm and helps to focus his thoughts for the upcoming article he plans to write on the inscription on the 4th century silver and carnelian ossuary in the Vatican. Wetman writes his articles with a fountain pen : he then dictates them to Collingwood who types them into the infernal computing machine that glows malignantly in the corner of the room. To type would ruin his perfectly-manicured nails. At mid-day Collingwood brings a freshly-ironed copy of the Wall Steet Journal in on a silver tray and Wetman checks on the progress of his not-inconsiderable holdings. Then he returns to his ponderings. At nine the Bentley arrives to take him to his favourite restaurant. Wetman is a small eater but a good tipper. He never eats fish. He returns to the apartment for a final session of dictation with Collingwood, and retires to bed (a seventeenth-century English oak tester) at around midnight. He sleeps well, untroubled either by dreams or worries. Tomorrow, an article on the powdering of Marie-Antoinette's wig beckons...... Piepacker 16:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Close enough. Central Park is within very easy reach but not directly in either of the views. Books overflow into the living-rooms and bedrooms as well, but a public library is a street away. The (smaller) aquariums are against exterior walls, as the floor joists are over a century old. Wetman hunts-and-pecks his articles directly at the keyboard and has never had a manicure: think Wilfred Brimley. Wetman is an excellent cook who can scarcely afford to eat in restaurants the kind of cuisine he expects at home. The paper is The New York Times. Glad you enjoyed levée. Right about fish, wrong century for the bed. --Wetman 16:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Wild man of the woods Walden Wilfred Wetman. Quite shattered my illusions....... I had you down as an immaculately-groomed aesthete and you're really a big old hairy lumberjack. Thanks for welcoming me, by the way : s'nice to belong! Piepacker 17:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

thumb|left|100px|Trashin' Xerxes?

[edit] Comment.

About this [5] edit, please consider WP:BITE. Also, your moving of the contents of the Xxs talkpage to talk:300 was very ill-advised. In case somebody tries to re-add a similar image later, a record of the previous arguments made on the subject would be useful. Editing of other people's comments on talkpages other than for archiving should be done fairly rarely, as I am sure you know. Hornplease 03:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

No editing was done, needless to say: I would not have stooped to that, as you would agree if you knew me at all. But ranting indirectly about the political correctness of the kitsch movie 300 is as irrelevant at Talk:Xerxes I of Persia as rant about the cultural politics of Disney's Hercules would be at Talk:Heracles. I did bite this particular newcomer, and at his own Talkpage too, as follows: "The wikipedia article Xerxes I of Persia concerns a historical figure, not a 2007 movie with the cultural weight of Anna Nicole Smith's funeral. All discussion of that movie has been moved to Talk:300 (film), where it will not interfere with adult discourse. Do please feel free to continue your inflammatory rant at Talk:300 (film). I can imagine that your "deep interest in ancient civilizations" will begin to produce some constructive content at Wikipedia in the near future."

Harsh words indeed. But fully informative. My final remark might have been interpreted as pointed encouragement— to one who claims in edit summary of his rant, "Added info which a troll removed." however; his User contributions so far make me privately doubtful that anything of value is likely to come from this incipient troublemaker. Time may prove me wrong: I certainly hope so.--Wetman 03:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Editing, as I understand it, extends to removal of comments unless to a clearly marked archive. Please note that while I agree with you about irrelevance, a clear statement of that on the talkpage as a marker to potential future editors would have been more helpful than moving the discussion on its relevance. Thank you for your time. Hornplease 04:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

My correspondent is misinformed: "editing" does not extend to re-filing to a page that has been clearly marked at the former location. My work in this has been unexceptionable. But enough of this.--Wetman 17:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 300 (film)

I am not sure that I understand. Folks are upset over the placement of the Xerxes image in the 300 article, or in the Xerxes page? Arcayne 13:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

You'll find all the former rant about 300 (film), which was inappropriately at Talk:Xerxes I of Persia, now safely cut-n-pasted (and out of adult earshot) at Talk:300 (film). That's all there is to it. The image is pointless as an illustration of the historic Xerxes, and needlessly irritating to Iranian nationalists and grown-ups alike. --Wetman 16:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] European Libraries

Well thank you for those very kind words at the pump! There is in fact a problem, which is Special:Contributions/Fleurstigter , who has been adding links & starting hopeless little stubs in a reckless fashion & works for the Dutch Royal Library who host the site. From her talk page & elsewhere I think they have been reasonably patient with her in fact; & she has been rather difficult. The en:wiki blacklist page is #1 here. I have now suggested they block her for a bit & unblock the site, which seems the right way round. If they had told me that earlier at Meta-Wiki .... Sorry if I have shot too soon on this one, & led you to do the same in referring to it, but the general problem as given at the pump does exist, and not only has this one not been dealt with correctly, but the process happens in an obscurity, which we are both discovering more about, it seems. Johnbod 05:37, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, block the spamming user, instead, and inspect the site. Last September a newbie (see User talk:Dmill96) posted external links to Professor Mary Ann Sullivan's website with excellent architectural photos and instructive commentary, which were methodically deleted by User:JeremyA. I posted the following query at User:JeremyA's talkpage: "You seem to be methodically deleting external links recently added by newbie User:Dmill96 to Professor Mary Ann Sullivan's pages of excellent architectural photos and informative text. What is your motivation?" He responded at my Talkpage: "Hi Wetman! I have nothing against Dmill96 (talk • contribs), or the website that he/she was linking to. However, where I see external links that are outwith the guidelines described at WP:EL I delete them. There are many excellent websites out there, but we don't link to them all because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a web directory." User:Dmill96 was repelled and did not edit after 9 September 2006. Like most problems with offensive and intrusive editors, this is a systemic toxin. A class issue, to be quite frank.--Wetman 06:41, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Teeheeee

Wow. I could swear I reverted that last nonsense change to the French Revolution - thank you very much for catching it! I need more coffee. Kuru ^talk 03:01, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Excellent Edit to Fable

You must be tired of all the kudos, but your edit in Fable was precisely what I was grasping at. Putting it in context, as you did, was spot on. Thanks. --Lloegr-Cymru^{£ ¥} 12:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Lloegr-Cymru, that's always encouraging to hear! and together our edits inspired User:Logologist to make the article even richer and tighter! I'm three-eighths Welsh myself. --Wetman 19:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to come back a week later (almost), but I completely agree. What occurred is precisely what ought to happen much more often here. I only hope that my measly little edits can have as much impact in future. As a side note, let me just say that any amount of Welsh makes you all Welsh in my book.--Lloegr-Cymru^{£ ¥} 18:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Of the Borghese Vase and other pots…

Thanks! I have some pictures of French furniture from the Petit Palais, I'll upload them to Commons. I don't know if the Musée des Arts Décoratifs allows photography, I'll try and check. Concerning Greek ceramic, what do you mean by “close-up details”? I've tried recently to shoot details like Image:Detail Douris CdM 539 n2.jpg in order to show the painter's stroke. Is that what you were thinking about? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 15:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

A beautiful image, like so many of yours. I meant illustrations of the mythic content, a less sophisticated level. Visual definitions. --Wetman 19:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

You might want to look at categories commons:Category:Greek antiquities in the Louvre - Room 39 to commons:Category:Greek antiquities in the Louvre - Room 44. I've shot almost all shootable vases in the Campana Gallery at the Louvre, but the curators keep setting up new vases from time to time. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:52, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sainte Chapelle

I'd added three references, summoned from the web, but quite respectable, with Runciman etc. The odd thing is how low down the list it comes (3rd ref). It doesn't, unlike the star Crown of Thorns, seem to be reflected in the iconography of the SC, but there seems no doubt that an item with, by medieval standards, a pretty plausible provenance, was in Paris. but I'm of course willing to listen to arguments otherwise. Johnbod 02:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, pretty sound, with Runciman. I'll open up his article on JSTOR and get better informed. ...and there it is! sanctam toellam tabulae infertam, the Holy Towel in the papal bull! Thanks! --Wetman 03:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem - meanwhile I'm getting into some heavy laundry on the Veil of Veronica; I'm not sure how much I can be bothered to run the full cycle it needs. Of course do edit the Image as you see fit, Johnbod 03:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lost Houses

The book you recomended has just arrived - have you read it? One could weep! Giano 10:17, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

No, I've seen it in a house where I was a weekend guest. In days past I used to travel from one person's library to another's, staying up to all hours and coming down puffy the next morning at the last stages of breakfast. --Wetman 10:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proper Do you know!

Do you know what is the correct architectural term for the type of domed roof on the tower at the centre of this picture Image:Tong Castle Shropshire.jpg? Onion dome does not seem quite right - I'm sure I've heard they do have a name - but it escapes me. Giano 14:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Cupola? -- ALoan (Talk) 14:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

No, ALoan - wrong! Giano 14:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Why not? Looks like an upturned hexagonal (octagonal?) cup to me.

Gothic dome? Hexagonal dome? Ogee dome? It is a bit too slim and angular to be a bulbous or onion dome. -- ALoan (Talk) 15:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Ogee dome I think - I'll check my dictionary tonight but this site [6] [7] shows similar (althought smaller), described as an Ogee dome. --Joopercoopers

yep I think you are right - that sounds right and looks right. Giano 16:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

It's a faceted ogee dome - no doubt to remind the patron of his days at The House- [[8]] Johnbod 17:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

OK I will go with that, but why am I thinking it is more a feature of the English Renaissance than Gothic - as seen at Burghley House etc, or am I barking up a wrong tree completely? Wonder where the kindly Mr Wetman is ? - he is bound to know Giano 18:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's right - the Oxford one was added by Wren to Cardinal Wolsey's unfinished base of the 1520's, which is late Perpendicular. I think there are examples that early in England, though I can't remember where. So I suppose it's a Renaissance element in the English late Gothic style, which of course lagged a long way behind Italy. Johnbod 18:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Good that's good - so going further with my instinct and gut feeling am I correct referring to the house here [9] as "Strawberry Hill Gothic" with English Renaissance anomalies, I don't want to be hauled over red hot coals when it goes onto mainspace! Giano 18:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

English domes in the 1520s? Predating the dome at St Peters? Presumably inspired by Brunelleschi's dome in Florence? -- ALoan (Talk) 18:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Your text looks fine. They are commonest under Elizabeth, but the small ones on Wolsey's facade at Hampton Court are original 1520's, I'm pretty sure. [10] Johnbod 18:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

OK thanks a lot Johnbod, I'll stick with it - like the new additions to the lead ALoan? Giano

I have found references to an early ogee dome at the Attarine mosque (previously church of St. Athanasius) in Alexandria, but the spam filter ate my post and link. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

(wakes up with a snort) You're a quick lot: can't take a nap on me own sofa... Johnbod had it pegged with "facetted ogee dome" and his allusion to Tom Tower must be apt. At Tong, the Gothick taste seems to have embraced even the latest Gothic survivals, though George Durant doesn't sound like he'd appear in Alumni Oxonienses. --Wetman 19:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

No it appears he was a "trader", alas not of the variety found on Wall Street Giano 20:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

• I wonder - do any of your book mention this house "Carclew" in Cornwall Image:Carclew House.jpg inspite of being built just after 1800 all my books and references call it Palladian. In spite of the selian windows in the pavilions I want to put it in the neoclassical section of my "depressing page" - do you think I'm wrong, in photographs (all copyright) it looks even more neoclassical - if you look the piano nobile is on a pediment in the neoclassical style rather than above a service floor - I would appreciate your view? I can't call it Neoclassical if all references oppose me! Giano 14:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah don't worry too much it seems it was destroyed by fire in 1934 and not demolished, so is inelligible for my page! If we can decide on its style, I'll dump it somewhere useful - I keep looking at it, I suppose if those pavillions did not have pediments it would look less palladian, in fact rather like Castle Coole. Giano 15:05, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, in Colvin, 3rd ed., it is shown to be by Thomas Edwards (died 1775), who lived at Greenwich but had an extensive practice in Cornwall. Of Carclew, near Penrhyn, Colvin says (p 335) "The latter house was begun by Samuel Kempe in the 1720s, but was still incomplete in 1749 when it was sold to the mine-owner William Lemon. Lemon is said to have employed Edwards to add the portico and offices to the central block built by Kempe." The colonnades were added in "18——" according to Colvin (p. 336)— were the paired outbuildings quite separate before?— and the house gutted in 1934. By fire? I wondered, and you've confirmed it. In its rhythm and blocking and its rustication (less bold in the photos perhaps?) it actually seems fully Palladian to me. --Wetman 15:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

....but built on a pediment not a lower floor like Bavaria, recessed portico and it does look like Castle Coole, and it was built in 1800s.........OK no matter..I'ts not going in my page anyway - you would be amazed (perhaps you wouldn't) how many burnt down almost as many as were demoloshed, including an astounding and highly suspicious amount in the weeks immediatly prior to the grading and preservation system being introduced in teh early 1960s. I'm learning more about the 20th century English and their attitdes to their heritage than I really want to know. Giano 15:32, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Were gaslight and early electricity also culprits? When I first saw Erddig in the 60s, uninsulated electric wires ran through some rooms, held away from mouldings by ceramic insulators. --Wetman 15:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I once heard that at Hatfield House in the 1920 and 30s the Salisbury's used to sit after dinner in a pannelled drawing room, with bare wires running along the panels - periodiacally one would hiss, spit and smoke - without breaking conversation a member of the family would just throw a cushion at it! So yes probably, I should think so Giano 16:23, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• Just found this [11] gutted appears to be something of an understatement for poor old Carclew! Giano 17:08, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Those are inexpressibly mournful. You've picked a tragic subject, Giano. --Wetman 17:46, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• But it is going to have a happy ending Montacute House was saved from demolition at the very last moment, so was Hartwell House - I shall end it on a very upbeat note - on the other hand = I am rather fond of grand opera and a good weep, there is one rather spectacular photo of a scottish castle exploding into a million peices - I could perhaps have one of those sound tracks with Callas "O Scarpia, avanti a Dio!" Giano 17:57, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

The Hatfield story dates from more like the 1880s - Hatfield was almost the first house to have electricity. The PM Marquess experimented with electricity himself. The cushion story is in David Cecil's book called I think the Cecils of Hatfield or similar.

Johnbod 19:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

What was the château in the Ile-de-France that was imploded for tax reasons (1970s?) with a champagne going-away picnic to mark the occasion? I wasn't invited... By the way, I tried googling "blow up chateau" and all I got was 'Allo 'allo plot outlines... --Wetman 21:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I dunno, but I do remember my parents generation having a very surreal time when this place was abandoned. Giano 21:58, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Racisim

This user is a racist against Turks and Turkish culture. See his support on the unrealistic events on the Hagia Sophia topic.

(The unsigned post is a discourtesy fully characteristic of this furious anonymity. Wetman's distaste for soccer-stadium fascism is not especially directed at gutter Turks, but across the board, at intellectual dishonesty, bullying and the instinct for censorship. In real life, Wetman's personal contacts over the years have been limited perforce to stylish and educated Turks, secular and internationl in outlook and unshadowed by the culture of denial that is Turkey's malignant cancer. This poster's User contributions speak for themselves to show a consistently toxic presence at Wikipedia.)

Sorry, i forgot the signature. Reality is, the mosaics are not destroyed or deleted or moved by Turks and there is no evindence to that. It is not censorship to correct the article about Hagia Sophia. But it is racism to blame Turks with something that they did not do. And this topic has nothing to do with soccer-stadiums or the user's real life friends, it is about the views and acts.--hnnvansier 12:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re. Semi-protecting Zeus

No problem. :-) Keep up the good work. Regards, Húsönd 19:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: This user's attempted censorship

This User's censorship continues unabated: see Hagia Sophia. --Wetman 14:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

What I did is removing the articles without any sources. I stand against racism that many including you are in. --Lardayn 12:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Pedro copied the whole discussion from User_talk:Lardayn

All - please see WP:NPA. Thankyou. Pedro |  Talk  12:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pitreavie Castle

Do you do Scottish defended houses? -- ALoan (Talk) 14:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice start! No, Scotland's outside my ken. It's always wiser to know the limits of one competence. --Wetman 14:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

How about Spains Hall then? -- ALoan (Talk) 19:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I looked it through. Too vernacular for Howard Colvin, it ought to have been in Nicholas Coope, Houses of the Gentry but wasn't. Some of Victoria County History: Essex is on-line but a search there didn't fetch up any goodies. --Wetman 20:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, thanks anyway for the tweaks that you have made. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Marianna Mayer's quote about unicorns

Hello,

I'm doing a little research on some anonymous user, attempting to figure out, whether they are vandals, or potentially constructive, albeit at times misguided, contributors. What initially sparked my suspicion was their recent addition to the Signumd Freud article.

In your revision of the Unicorn article as of 21:11, 14 March 2004 you added a quote from a book by Marianna Mayer. In the revision of that article as of 20:46, 8 April 2006 the anonymous user affixed another sentence to that quote. This addition was later removed. Could you please let me know, whether the added sentence is taken from Ms. Mayer's book? Itayb 22:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to make a trip to the public library. --Wetman 05:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, then. Only if you happen to go there anyway. Thanks. Itayb 06:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

If you happen to check it out, please leave me a note in my talk page; i'm removing your talk page from my watchlist for now. Thanks. Itayb 07:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

On 3 April 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Conservatory Water, Central Park, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 10:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] T&B

Hi Wetman, I just saw that you undid all of the links I had posted. I do have many pages of content and photos on my site. Of the links I posted, there is only one (Senlis) that has photos for sale which to be honest I had overlooked, so it was an innocent mistake. I thus understand removing the link to the Senlis page, but not the other pages of cathedral photos. Have a nice evening, Narayan

The best way to incorporate external links is as a supporting footnote embedded in the text following the statement that is supported by the link, using <ref></ref> html and a {{Reflist}} following the See also section. Photos-for-sale galleries are deleted whenever they're discovered at Wikipedia, I've noticed. Four tildes will sign and datestamp your posts on talkpages. --Wetman 12:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)