This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ian Spackman. 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.
Hi Ian - i have nothing against moving Rubygate scandal to Rubygate, but when i created the article i first looked up Watergate in Wikipedia, and it took me to Watergate scandal...Have a nice day :) --ItemirusMessage me!06:38, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Itemirus. I hope my instinct was right, and of course I won’t be remotely offended if anyone moves it back. I hadn’t realised that the Watergate affair was at Watergate scandal: perhaps because it was named after the pre-existent building complex? Or because there are things called watergates? I expect now someone will discover a genuinely jewel-encrusted rubygate that that needs an article – in an the Arabian Nights, perhaps. Or at Villa Certosa, where it opens on the sala bungissima. Best wishes! Ian Spackman (talk) 07:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Before you revert the article again, please take a look at the talk page. I thought the source was very clear, and the article very faithful to it. However, if you have suggestions, please make them (either in bold edits or on the talk page). I'm just not sure why you're deleting it en masse as it is so clearly sourced. Anyway, I just thought I'd give you a heads up that I have put all the info (the language from the article and the language from the source) on the talk page.
No mass reverts on my part: I just checked two or three assertions made in the article against the pages (or rather the single page) linked [ignoring the comments at the bottom of that page as not being reliable], and not finding them supported removed them. Perhaps I am missing something?Ian Spackman (talk) 10:15, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I have deprodded your PROD of Windisch-Graetz. The family was notable up to the early years of the last century - in fact, several of the people in the further reaches of his genealogical charts definitely are notable, but he seems to have a talent for never successfully linking to any of them - and deserves an article, but not the one that the apparent current family member has produced. I have therefore taken the alternative course of reverting the article to just before the point where User:M.Hugo Windisch-Graetz started editing it.
But thanks for your action. User:M.Hugo Windisch-Graetz seems to have been very busy across multiple language versions of Wikipedia recently, always with badly-produced, incoherent and exaggerated articles on his apparent relatives or himself - it really needs people to go through the articles he has edited, see which ones would still look notable if all his edits are removed and then collectively AFD the rest. PWilkinson (talk) 18:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi. About this, I think you didn't understand what I mean. LN is, before all, an autonomist party that is said to be populist especially by its opponents. Writing in the incipit "is a populist italian party" is, in the better case, a partial information because are absent more important ideologies and, in the worse, a non neutral point of view --Tia solzago (talk) 17:40, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Tia! Obviously it should say in the incipit that the Lega is autonomist, if it doesn’t already. I agree! (Whether it is essentially nationalist/separatist or regionalist/federalist is perhaps more complicated. I would have thought that in essence it was probably the former—like the Scots or Welsh Nats—, but they often seemed to claim the contrary, perhaps for tactical reasons. But populist? Undoubtedly: you only have to look at their posters and other propoganda, and at the vulgar manner of speech which their leaders habitually adopt. And, on the related issue of attitudes to ethnicity and race, on the British political spectrum they would belong to the far right: prominent members have habitually made statements which would have got them expelled from the British Tory party. And that, of course, relates to the issue of populism. Those are my impressions, anyway. (By the way I am not at all opposed to autonomist parties in principle—if I lived in Scotland I might well vote Nationalist.)
Those, of course, are just my views, and as far as Wikipedia is concerned entirely unimportant. But for reasons of NPOV the article does need to align itself with general descriptions of the party in mainstream, basically neutral, international sources. As an Englishman I find that the best-informed British mainstream news sources on Italian politics are the BBC (which has a commitment to avoiding bias as far as possible, even if it can’t always succeed), The Telegraph (right of centre, sometimes called the Torygraph), and The Guardian (left of centre, although it deserted Labour at the last election). Have a look at those sites and see how they tend to characterise the Lega in a handful of words. My guess is that you will find ‘populist’ as one of the most common terms used. (The most common will probably be racist/xenophobic/anti-immigrant.)
Hello, Ian (could I call you so?): I am writing you since I want to say that I changed the comments on Ortensio Faà di Bruno Faà di Bruno disambiguation page. I was not able to find anyting on him but this link: also it seems that there are two distinct persons having this name. The only references I found on Google are replica of the disambiguation page. Let me know if there is any problem. Daniele.tampieri (talk) 15:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi Daniele, and naturally call me Ian. I am always happy to know that someone other than the googlebot reads what I write! Unfortunately in those days we were not always very scrupulous in including citations, and I am afraid that I don‘t remember my sources for the wicked abate. (You were right to correct my ‘abbot’ mistranslation: probably he was something like a French abbé.) One of the sources could have been this: ‘Il conte Ortensio Faà, abate di Carentino, uomo di animo violento e bellicoso, nella notte di Pasqua del 1686, mise in atto una congiura contro il Marchese Moscheni di Bergamasco, assalendo il palazzo marchionale, ma riuscendo solo ad uccidere il figlioletto di sette anni del Marchese; fuggì nella repubblica di Genova e poi presso il convento dei Cappuccini di Ovada, dove morì impunito.’ Perhaps there was another which made it clear that this was not the only crime that he committed, and not the only time that he used benefit of clergy to escape civil justice. The source you found is interesting as it tells the same story with a different slant. There are a couple of tantalising snippets about him on Google Books: ‘… era [who?] entrato nella banda di un altro nobile, il cavaliere Ortensio Faà di Bruno, con cui aveva cercato d'uccidere il marchese Moscheni, penetrando nottetempo nella sua abitazione.’ And [apparently a quotation from a contemporary legal petition, though perhaps the book is a work of fiction]: ‘…[Sa]cra Congregazione del Santo Officio, di cui Vostra Eccellenza, è tanto degna parte, la causa criminale, sopra l’enorme assassinamento fatto a me et alla mia Casa nell’anno 1686 da Ortensio Faå di Bruno, Sacerdote e Prevosto di Carentino, Diocesi di Alessandria, ancorché mi giova lo sperare che in virtù del processo istruito da Monsignore Vescovo della medesima Città …’ I wonder if De’ Conti’s monumental (if often often rather dull) Notizie storiche della cittá di Casale e del Monferrato has anything to say. I’ll have a look, though I fear that google‘s indexing of the work is hit-and-miss, while his own index is frankly bizzare!
Certainly you are right that there were two Ortensios: the first, along with his brother (Ardizzone?) was a member of the sixteenth-century Monferrato senate: I think they were the first be created conti di Bruno. There are three family notables here in Luigi Cibrario (1860), including ‘Ortensio, pur senatore, fu investito nel fuedo di Bruno nel 1590, eretto poi in marchesato nel 1648.’
By the way, how do you pronounce Faà? Is it as two syllables, with the stress on the second? Or is the a lengthened? Or is it just the same as ‘fa’?
You are clever than me in using Google! :D :D Your analysis is quite comprehensive and correct: when you decide to work to an entry on Ortensio (or possibly the Ortensios), let me know. Concerning the pronounce of Faà, yes, I pronounce it as two syllables stressing the second one. Now let me make a question: are you interested in ancient Italian history? It seems to me that your knowledge of the field is higher than one would normally expect. All the best. Daniele.tampieri (talk) 07:00, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Lucedio Abbey
Why did you remove the category? I only sorted it.
I removed the category because it is the sort of nonsense (in my view) that can only bring Wikipedia into disrepute [we assert that there are paranormal places? Really?], and because I have seen no reputable, academically respectable sources which claim that the abbey a paranormal place. As for gardeners’ tools, yes I have a good few—perhaps we share a common interest? There are a number whose proper use is unknown to me. But I can assure you that I keep all of them well away from my computers. Best wishes, and happy editing! Ian Spackman (talk) 22:14, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the additional revert on the above article. I don't think we're getting the message through to the COI user, although there have been attempts on his talk page and that of the article. - Sitush (talk) 13:33, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
While you were writing this message I replied to your comment on the talk page. I find it all rather mysterious. I think probably that he [the user, who may or may not be the subject] speaks no English. Decidedly a problem for an editor of the English Wikipedia! Ian Spackman (talk) 13:57, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Apologies for deleting the citation - I missed the point completely there. I'll see if I can find a better (ie: more direct) one some time. Love your cmt on the user's talk page re: German WP <g> - Sitush (talk) 16:29, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
No apologies needed: the un-sensational fact was rather buried in an article on more contentious matters. But I was finding it difficult to turn up anything on Papal Gentleman and thought that CNN was better than nothing–especially as it basically corresponded to what the article already said. Ian Spackman (talk) 16:36, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Your difficulties beg the question ... are Papal Gentlemen notable? I'm steering well clear of that one. Will see if I have any more luck than you, preferably without resorting to my rudimentary Italian. - Sitush (talk) 16:41, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
‘Are Papal Gentlemen notable?’ is a very good question. As far as I could make out it is an honour which one would be proud of having bestowed upon one, if one were part of the black nobility. But doubtfully notable from a WP standpoint. I couldn’t even discover how many of them there were; and I only came up with two references to him on the Vatican website (simply included among lists of people present at (probably fairly important) meetings). And as a genuine job, a bit like being a part-time, nail-painting receptionist, except that you may have the unpleasant duty of having to make polite small talk to the likes of Cherie Blair and her spouse when escorting them to the papal chambers. I suspect the notability element of being an ambassador of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (or whatever it is called exactly—nothing about him on their website that I could find, by the way) is rather similar: far less important than being the San Marino ambassador to Liechtenstein. I’ve nothing against the chap (the subject I mean, not the user)—there seem to be good things to say about him. But notable? I couldn’t convince myself of that. I suspect an AFD may be in order. Or simply a PROD, if that hasn’t been tried before. Perhaps (if user and subject are one and the same) he is having a mid-life crisis? Why this obsession to dump foreign language texts on the various branches of Wikipedia? All very odd, and one doesn’t want to be harsh. But…. Ian Spackman (talk) 17:40, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
P.S. He has a distinctly pretty wife, who used to act in telenovellas as a hobby, and a herd of water buffalo. Interesting, but not really encyclopaedic. I suppose.
You share my opinions. We're either both great minds or both very stupid. I know which of those I think applies :) I've done some searching and without "gay" in the search, Google returns 181 hits for ""papal gentlemen"/"papal gentleman". Some of those are not for the office, either, but rather a general (archaic) term for Catholics. There is only one book worth mentioning that looks into the subject (on one page), although that book is cited by others. Google Scholar comes up with next to nothing if cites are excluded. Got the feeling that both the chap and his office may be heading for AfD but I do not want to rush it for fear of becoming too involved in one of those dreadful religious debates where there is too much POV and not enough common sense. Not seen his wife but she may be more notable! - Sitush (talk) 17:56, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Thought you should know that my attempt to get the person blocked for vandalism after more ping-pong today has failed as, apparently, it is not vandalism. Since it is disruptive, I can only presume that the admin took a very narrow view. Not sure where to go next with this - content dispute? - Sitush (talk) 19:31, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Ouch! Well, since the page has been static since your last edit, 48 hours ago, my instinct is to hope that he will now remain as quiet here as he has learnt to on the Italian, German, French and Czech editions. I can see that how many (if any) of his incompetently red-linking genealogical tables should be included can be seen as a content dispute, rather than an issue involving vandalism. But surely dumping text in foreign languages (after receiving warnings not to) and also removing both citations and requests for citations (after receiving warnings not to) are vandalism? I’m going to keep my fingers crossed, for now. But if it starts again I would guess that asking for advice on the COI and Vandalism noticeboards would be sensible. There must be something to be done—those other Wikipedias have done it! Or AFD. Like you, I’ve been half hoping that something that clearly established notability would turn up. But it hasn’t, and I no longer expect it to. I would certainly now vote for deletion unless someone came up with strong arguments against. Ian Spackman (talk) 16:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
The question after the recent events is: should I look at AfD. I note that the blocking admin also queried notability on AN/I, and that the ed. who found some additional sources for the foundation didn't deem them worthy of inclusion in the article itself. My gut feeling is that the entire thing should go as being, primarily, a vanity piece & one with little sourcing of merit. However, my heart says that the poor guy is no longer around to defend the article. It might have been the first "peep" out of him! - Sitush (talk) 00:24, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Annuario della Nobiltà Italiana
Hi Ian, I rollbacked the fake information introduced once again in the article by the same editor of the new Annuario. Could you please patrol? Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.113.152.181 (talk) 13:50, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
hey
I'm hoping you don't mean it has been me to most poison that talk page. I admit and apologize that I lost my cool seeing what this group tried to do, basically an ambush of the page and everything against the policies of wikipedia not being a democracy. I had noticed in the past that Noclador accused you and Supparluca of being sock puppets though. I've given up on understanding why these folks can not accept the compromised/shared solution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.129.139 (talk) 23:08, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
I doubt if the admin understood the allusion – at any rate he didn’t reply. But the reference to Voltaire was very deliberate: tedious and longwinded as Icsunonove’s interventions may have been at times, they did not deserve to be censored. That is what happened: a disgraceful block. Noclador is a good editor, as is Checco. Dohn Joe and Patavium may or may not be good editors: I haven’t come across their work so cannot know. Ian Spackman (talk) 17:42, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
My point being: By saying without at the same time blocking practically everyone else who has ever contributed to that battlefield of a discussion you are suggesting that there might be a couple of regular "warriors" who participated on a similar level. Unfortunately you don't say who else falls in that category, and so someone could assume that you include the users I named above.
Anyway, I guess the reason for our differences in the perception of Icsunonove's interventions is that he regarded you as a kind of "friend". On the other hand, all the users whom he identified as "enemies" got insulted, harassed and hurt for years (pig, nazi, ethnic warrior, nationalist... someone could write a dictionary). His block was not a mean of censorship (as Checco and you put it), but a mere consequence of the observation that he wasn't willing or able to contribute moderately and without personal attacks to discussions (nobody was expecting friendliness and cordiality!). You may find this unfair, for me it's a relief. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 19:02, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:La Stampa logo.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:La Stampa logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
The palazzo article is the most vague I ever read! I think what you're telling me is that Ducal Palace, Urbino is not exactly a "palace"? I jumped on the similar categories for other countries, and I see listed there everything too, from mansion palaces such as Ca' Tron to public palaces such as Palazzo Pretorio, Cividale or Caserta Palace. Exactly as category:Palaces in Italy (perhaps I could agree with you for Milan's skyscrapers, but honestly I did not know where to place them...). If there's some difference, it should be introduced at a global level, not just to Italian entries just because the word palazzo is also (mis)used by Anglophones, whose sources are notoriously crappish (especially in spelling) about everything written in Italian. Anyway, I remain open to discussion as usual... let me know and good work! --'''Attilios''' (talk) 13:02, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Ciao Ian! Here's an excerpt from the palace article's very intro (boldface is mine):
In many parts of Europe, the term is also applied to ambitious private mansions of the aristocracy. Many historic palaces are now put to other uses such as parliaments, museums, hotels or office buildings. The word is also sometimes used to describe a lavishly ornate building used for public entertainment or exhibitions.
So I think we can apply to word "palace" to Italian palazzi... as I told you in the previous message, it seems just a matter of goat's wool stemming from the fact that English sources also use (improperly, from what I can see) the Italian word. Ciao and good work. --'''Attilios''' (talk) 13:21, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Non-Free rationale for File:La Stampa front page 2006-12-10.jpg
If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
/* External links */ Added an external link to a non-profit, non-commercial scholarly blog about Italian food historyFoodinitaly (talk) 20:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm still wondering why the external link to my scholarly blog about Italian food history was an inappropriate link. Thanks much for your20:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Foodinitaly (talk) feedback. Zachary Nowak (foodinitaly, www.foodininitaly.org)
Apologies, just saw the note you put under "Italian cuisine." That post was from my co-author, and I can't speak for it other than to say that you are correct in saying it is not scholarly. I will take the issue up with him, and not add more links until the issue is resolved. Thanks for your input and explanations. Zach — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foodinitaly (talk • contribs) 20:43, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
And thanks for your good work on the Italian cheese template: it looks much better now. I haven’t replied to your question on the talk page there yet because I keep changing my mind as to what I think, but I’ll try to put my thoughts together later today.
Hi Ian, re this edit, I think a summary section would be a good idea, I didn't do it myself because I lacked the time to commit to anything of that scale. If you could do this, it would be most appreciated. Regards, —James(Talk • Contribs) • 7:08pm •09:08, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks James. I don’t see how I can find time to do anything before next Tuesday, but I’ll try to then if nobody has done it already. Cheers, Ian Spackman (talk) 16:33, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the notifications, Mike. A good idea to standardise these. I’ve recorded my (not very strongly held) views on the discussion page. Best wishes, Ian Spackman (talk) 23:48, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Season's Greetings
May you have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
It's the festive time of the year, and I wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! If you do not celebrate Christmas, may it be a peaceful time for you, and may the New Year bring you new hopes and good luck. Season's Greetings --&レア (talk) 18:07, 22 December 2011 (UTC)|}
This is Theologiae (it's my new signature), I just wanted to pass by to wish you happy holidays!
Thank you so much for the strawberries! It's morning here, so I'll be enjoying them for my breakfast :-) Happy editing!--&レア (talk) 09:15, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello Ian Spackman/Archive 2! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.
Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.
You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey
"Tony Blair Faith Foundation Page"
Ian – I am from TBFF would like to comply with Wikipedia’s spirit and policy and do not wish to “whitewash” or COI. That said, I would like to provide up-to-date information on our programmes (we have more than FGI) and update the page to reflect correct information about directors and trustees. I want to do this transparently. I appreciate you taking on board our changes to ensure page accuracy. Thank youSav555 (talk) 12:18, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I rollbacked the fake information introduced once again in the article by the same editor of the new Annuario. Could you please patrol? Many thanks.
Non-free rationale for File:Tuttosport.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Tuttosport.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:09, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Princess Marcella Borghese
Please revert my grandmother's name back to Princess Marcella Borghese. This is her married name which she preferred and was most known by. It is inappropriate to use her birth name as her main name under Wikipedia. For example, when one searches Princess Diana, her married name is the main name in Wikipedia, not her birth name.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_diana
As her grandson, and one who was very close to her, i have been overseeing her site recently and was extremely unhappy with the edits that were being made. It appears that someone from Borghese cosmetics has been using her page as an advertisement for their products and also included some false information about the ownership of the company. Please make this correction. I have contacted Wikipedia and they instructed me to first reach out to you but if the change is not made back, they have instructed me to inform them of this. If you are being instructed by a third part to make other changes, i would appreciate you first check with me as i beleive this third party has ulterior unethical motives. I would sincerely appreciate your cooperation. Lorenzo Borghese — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boardroom09 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
I take extreme umbrage at the suggestion that I might be ‘being instructed by a third part [sic]’. I am sorry that I am unable to give a sound translation of ‘umbrage’ into Italian, a word which your translating dictionary may be no better than my Collins-Sansoni at translating. The expressions to have at the back of your mind when trying to translate ‘umbrage’ include ‘porca madonna’ and ‘vaffanculo’. Forget ‘ombra’, although it’s cognate: we’re talking far more than an ombretta!
I imagine that we agree that the article as it stands is fucking useless. So WP:AFD might be a good place to take it.
Best wishes, Ian
Cosmetics on ANI
Hi, Ian. The block of ExcuseMeNYC has now had a coda on ANI. Pretty audacious, this! I should have been watching that page, but was not. Anyway, I admired your cogent questions here, but I don't suppose the user heard them. Late and soon, we waste our best material. Bishonen | talk09:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC).
Belatedly (but intermittently failing to fail, or perhaps I mean the opposite [see above]): clearly your audacity in this matter was exactly what was needed. Certainly seems to have worked. On a faintly related issue I wonder whether you might keep a glance for a day or two upon Anna del Conte? I was too hard on Lorenzo and I am fairly sure that in this case the SPA with a COI [she works for Del Conte’s literary agency: assuming her username is kosher] is someone it would be good to keep as a Wikipedian. I’m not concerned to keep every jot and tittle of what I added to that article, but I always get worried when I think that someone has an agenda. And I also worry that I might over-react. Ian Spackman (talk) 13:28, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Edited the article and posted to the new editor's talk, edit conflicting you. Poor noob, first she gets nothing and then all that. ;-) Bishonen | talk15:04, 26 June 2013 (UTC).
I almost removed the sentence you did, because it did stick out a bit. But then I thought perhaps she [Anna del Conte] does want to stick out a bit from we Anglo Saxons. But no problems over the removal.
More broadly, I do worry a bit about the situation of new Wikipedia editors. My first edit, as an anon, I remember vividly. I have no recollection as to which article it was, but certainly I thought there was something that should be added to it and I added it. Within five minutes, at the most, it had been changed, with the rather bald edit summary of ‘style’. I was furious! Had I not attended a fairly prestigious university to study English language and literature? Half an hour later I decided to check exactly the change that had been made to my ‘style’. Cripes! Someone had taken a contribution I had made and, without changing the meaning, had made it distinctly clearer. Hmmmn, this is really, really good. Of course it has never again happened so quickly. Not once. Ian Spackman (talk) 15:20, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Did You (Who?) Call?
Very odd. I keep getting told via a vivid orange notice at the top right that I have new messages. Presumably a WP software glitch. But if not, and you the sender are reading this, please try again: your first message must have blackholed. Ian Spackman (talk) 19:09, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
One of the artist's favourite little models. Her hatred of him becomes more apparent with every picture he painted.
Well, being dressed is not necessarily decent, or even innocent! Buggereau here is posibly the most pornographic artist of the 19th century, but his 21st-century fans are totally blind to it! Sleeves and socks and stocking and pointy red slippers may simply be clothes, or on the other hand, they may not! Amandajm (talk) 15:39, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Slipping the sock off, one feels, is only the start. (Or so W-A B hopes.) But it’s a little difficult to read this image with 19th-century eyes: I just see the sock as a condom. Ian Spackman (talk) 15:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
I don’t disagree with you about Bouguereau, but there is something curiously (photographically) honest about about the image: he depicts her hatred (which hangs between boredom—natural in a sitter—and loathing) quite vividly. Ian Spackman (talk) 16:07, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, the honesty is extraordinary. But I think it is also part of the artistic game that he is playing. He was plainly abusing a couple of these girls, and painted all sorts of takes on that theme. No doubt some of his clientele would have recognised the expression on her face. Many of his paintings were overtly erotic portraits of young women. It is the paintings of children and young teens like this one that are really offensive. And while he when he wasn't doing this, he was painting saccharine-sweet Madonnas surrounded by angels. Yuk!
I just went off for a little stained-glass window trek..... (on the internet, I mean) ...Oh how I love early Clayton and Bell glass. The colour combinations are scintillating! But as its nearly 3.00 am, I ought to do a sudoko o two and turn in! Amandajm (talk) 16:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Explanation
Hi Ian,
About the article Massimo Taccon I've deleted the templates because I added additionals citations and references from reliable secondary sources.
Can you give me an explanation?
Thanks < B.a.c.i.4. (talk) 22:07, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Certainly. In your recent series of edits[1] you added two items: a link to an OPAC entry for Massimo Taccon : Simmetrie: il colore, la linea, il segno, la superficie (a work which was already listed under the References section of the article) and a link to the archive of the Rome Quadriennale, demonstrating that it has a copy of the Meditavismo Critico manifesto. Let’s take these one by one.
Massimo Taccon : Simmetrie: il colore, la linea, il segno, la superficie
The text is written by Fabio Taccon (an author unkown to VIAF [2]) and published by La Taccon Arte. This seems hardly likely to be a work entirely independent of the subject of the article. The new link, certainly, gives credence to the existence of the text. But I fail to see how the text itself can be construed as representing the kind of independent coverage in third-party, reliable sources that is required to demonstrate the notability of the subject of a Wikipedia article. Indeed, curious to find out something about this publisher (so-called), googling "La Taccon Arte" takes me straight to this page, whose telling title reads: ‘La Taccon Arte art studio & Gallery - buy art of the italian "Maestro" Taccon Massimo Home’.
Furthermore, this seems to be an extremely rare book. It is unkown to WorldCat, [3] and not a single academic library in the UK has a copy.[4] The book is unknown to Google books,[5] and to Amazon.[6] Even eBay.it—a surprisingly good source for rare Italian books, or so I have found—knows nothing of it.[7]. Most tellingly, perhaps, the Italian National Library Service[8] is only able to locate one copy of this text, namely the one which your edit referred to in the Biblioteca della Fondazione La Quadriennale di Roma.[9]
The fact that a copy of the manifesto has been deposited here seems quite unremarkable, given that the archive contains information on more than 13,500 artists, groups and movements active in Italy over the last century. In practice, only a tiny fraction of those artists can be notable in the encyclopaedic sense. (That is not a criticism of the archive, of course: such collections are intended to contain a lot of stuff verging on junk, because who knows what revaluations there will be in the future? Some of the ‘junk’ will turn out to be precious.)
So I hope you will understand why I believe that the three templates {{Refimprove}}, {{Notability}} and {{BLP primary sources}} need to remain in the article for the time being.
Can anybody explain H T I? There aren’t many words in lo Zingarelli beginning with ‘H’. And indeed m. has me rather stumped.Ian Spackman (talk) 00:24, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Società Ernesto De Angeli e C, a textile company manufacturing cotton prints<ref> Giorgio Fiocca, [http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/ernesto-de-angeli_(Dizionario-Biografico)/ ‘DE ANGELI, Ernesto’,
And where, might I ask, does your expertise lie? Who knows, it is quite possible that you could make a useful contribution to Wikipedia. Anyone can edit it. Ian Spackman (talk) 05:12, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Ingria
Hi,
about the photo of Ingria (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ingria,_Piedmont) I think the photos I inserted (Ingria_ (TO) _-_Piazza.jpg) is better Representative of Ingria.
The photo shows the church, the town hall, the square and the bell tower (recently renovated).
In the old photo instead you see only the bell tower and the colonial house; personally I find this photo very bad.
I preferred the original image not because it was a better photograph (it’s not) but because it shows our readers at a glance what must be the single most important thing about the place: it is in a mountainous region. Cheers, Ian Spackman (talk) 05:25, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
You've reverted my objections on Raeti stating that "the references were perfectly clear".
1. There is a technical issue: the reference's links point to the "Notes"; there is a "References" section below, but, it's merrily a list of the literature used, without a clear connection to the citations themselves. Some of the those items are linked to the respective Wikipedia articles rather to the relevant bibliographical informations. (No item is linked to a bibliographical reference, or to the source itself.) There is an item cited (as a "note") that hasn't been listed below, among "References".
2. All items listed as "References" lack publisher, place and any kind of bibliographical reference. Furthermore, some of them are marked as "(online)". So, why the links haven't been provided!???
3. Is there any official Wikipedia instruction about how to cite ancient authors, maps, encyclopedias etc.? In my view, have the citations been quoted by original text, that is in Latin or Greek, maybe it could be considered acceptable even if they are referenced just as "Livy V.33". But, a meaning of a citation in English depends strongly not only on the original, but also on its interpretation, that is - translation. So, the data like edition, publisher, year etc. and/or an appropriate bibliographical reference should be mandatory for ancient authors too.
4. The citations in Wikipedia should be verifiable. The citations referenced like in this article appear hard to verify, if verifiable at all. Kornjaca (talk) 02:27, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, Kornjaca, I seem to have overlooked your message. I’ll read it tomorrow, have another look at the article and reply. Best wishes, Ian Spackman (talk) 08:07, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Comune
Hi, Ian! I believe our paths may have crossed before, as I think that you, like me, sometimes edit articles on Italian topics. I noticed the change you made at Val Taleggio, replacing comuni with "communes", and it piqued my curiosity. I don't think "commune" is any longer the English word, though I'm sure it was in the past. My personal experience counts for nothing, but to me a commune is either a bunch of hippies in a Welsh sheep-farm, or something in French history; I would no more think of referring to the administrative district I live in as a commune than I would talk of going to Leghorn or The Marches. More to the point, I notice that our article here is at Comune; that comuni are listed in our List of comuni of Italy, which is actually a list of lists, each entitled Comuni of the Province of Foo. Those have between them been edited by a rather large number of editors; it looks as if there might be a sort of local consensus that we use comune as we do frazione, and as we do not use provincia or regione. Of course at the level of a single article it matters disappearingly little. Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:53, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Indeed our paths crossed yesterday on the article List of Italian cattle breeds—we must be among the few who watch that page! (I think I started the article on the piemontese breed, though it is the little Alpine ones—usually covered with flies, poor things—which I most enjoy meeting.) As to the comune issue I am really not sure what to think. I dislike leaving it in Italian because hardly any of our readers will know what it means. I don’t much like ‘municipality’ because as an Englishman I find it archaic—it reminds me of the municipal baths where I learnt to swim—and over technical. (It may be more readily understood by speakers of other English dialects, of course.) Overall I prefer ‘commune’ on the basis that that is the word which the dictionaries I possess (both English and Italian-English) recommend. Still, I accept that it too is problematic, for the reasons that you give. But using the word ‘commune’ does have a couple of minor advantages: it reminds people that these entities are related to the medieval communes, and also to the the French commune (in the general municipal sense, rather than to the Paris commune of 1870[-ish] and its communards) which provided, via the Napoleonic occupation, the model for local government in the restored Kingdom of Sardinia and (with modifications made by the Rattazzi decree) for united Italy. Anyway, I have only one clear rule on this: the Italian word comune must be italicized while the English word commune is set in Roman. Cheers, Ian Spackman (talk) 04:42, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
P.S. Don’t get me going on condottiero vs. condottiere.
Justlettersandnumbers, that "sort of local consensus" is simply called "law" :) Of course, the facts can change, and they are changing, since the comuni can be, and many are actually being abolished. Now, in the crisis time, even many provinces are in danger of being abolished. But, comune is not just an "administrative district"; it's local self-government. The provinces, not comuni, are meant as the state representations at the local level (i.e. "administrative districts"); it is the level where The State of Italy is acting directly. A comune usually corresponds to a city, or a town (or a village, although the Italians usually see any village as a town), unless it's too small to maintain the all administration on its own, since it would be too expensive. In such a case, at some point they have to agree to be added to some larger neighboring comune, as a "frazione" (fraction). The places in the areas considered as disadvantaged have some big benefactions, but, there're frequent abuses (there're "mountain communities" at the see level and similar), so there is a pressure to abolish most of them. The regions (the biggest divisions) should become a kind of federal units (in fact, they do have some competences), so, they are also a type of self-government (at the macro level).
Ian, "comune" and "municipio" are basically synonyms in the Italian and are rather equally used. Although "municipio" refers more to the administrative side (administration itself and its buildings) and "comune" more to the whole entity, the words are interchangeable.
Speaking about the Paris Commune... of course, the revolution comes in mind first, but, it was nothing else but - the comune of Paris, just like any comune in Italy - the local self-government of the city of Paris. The revolutionary factions had conquered the power in that particular local self-government, then they clashed with the central government, then the clash became an armed clash and then it was regarded as a revolution.
Comuni have existed, continuously, in Piedmont too, long before the Kingdom of Sardinia - since the Middle Ages. Decretto Rattazzi didn't affect them very much. The French model was primarily applied to the next higher levels - the provinces and the "circondari" (the level that doesn't exist any more, between the provinces and the comuni), they should have provided the centralized administration. The comunal self-government can be, and could always have been, since the Middle Ages, suppressed by imposing a "podesta" (and it was a rule in the Austria-governed regions). But, it is an emergency act, not a normal state of order (a podesta is a kind of "acting mayor").
The piemontese breed is not properly "the little ones". They are rather large and very muscular. In fact, they are bread for meat only. Of course the cows can be milked, but, they are not primarily raised for that purpose and the statement in the English Wikipedia (about "dual-purpose") is wrong (see, for example, the Italian Wikipedia article). Kornjaca (talk) 04:48, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, Kornjaca, I seem to have overlooked this message too. I’ve glanced at it quickly and see that you have a good knowledge of Italian local government and its history (better than mine, I am sure): a topic which we cover in a rather confused manner in this Wikipaedia.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Valpelline (valley), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Our Lady of the Snows (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library is expanding, and we need your help! With only a couple of hours per week, you can make a big difference in helping editors get access to reliable sources and other resources. Sign up for one of the following roles:
Account coordinators help distribute research accounts to editors.
Partner coordinators seek donations from new partners.
Outreach coordinators reach out to the community through blog posts, social media, and newsletters or notifications.
Technical coordinators advise on building tools to support the library's work.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Hello, Ian Spackman. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
why do you start a WP page without refs? i mean you must have what you wrote about Lys (Dora Baltea) from somewhere. 10 years after still no refs, shuck !
original research from reading a map ??
--Wuerzele (talk) 10:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Regions of Italy (imagemap)
Hello, Ian Spackman. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Thanks for uploading File:Piemme-logo-200.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Hello, Ian Spackman. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buzzi Unicem until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:11, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes, Issue 32
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019
#1Lib1Ref
New and expanded partners
Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
Global branches update
Bytes in brief
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. LizRead!Talk!18:46, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Literally cannot find any indication this is a particularly notable brand of heater. Even its owner company, Systemair, is a redlink - and I can't find anything about them to make an article with either. No article for this topic on the Swedish Wikipedia, which says a lot for a Swedish product.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
_-_Before_The_Bath_(1900).jpg)
