This is an archive of past discussions with User:Kafka Liz. 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.
Ah, good. I wanted to be sure I'd deciphered everything correctly. Glad it works. Feel free, obviously, to tweak it as you see fit. Kafka Liz (talk) 23:56, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Kokoschka, Klimt, et al
Ping. I'm off to the library tomorrow to finish off a paper on Rudolf Koch, last great designer of fraktur type, so I'll take a take a look at Klimt sources while I'm there. Cheers, Lithoderm00:10, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Jesus, I used to love that song at the time, back when I was about thirteen or so and had completely forgotten about it. Clicked on it from your userpage and it was weird, I knew all the lyrics, but not from where. Also [2] 02:15, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
It's empty here! I hadn't even noticed. I have two favors: one, can you have a look at Histoires ou contes du temps passé - please feel free to copyedit! - and tell me if it makes sense. I have a ton still to add to the themes section but feels as though I'm getting lost already. Also, I'd like your opinion re Bal des Ardents and specifically the section on folklore and medieval manuscripts. There's a section on the talk page re the folklore and I'm conflicted - would prefer to keep it, but if it doesn't fit, it doesn't fit. There's a section on my talk re the French chroniclers - not sure what more can be done there, but thought you might have some insight. I'll should be out for most of the rest of the day, perhaps even longer, but will be checking in for messages. Thanks a bunch. Truthkeeper (talk) 16:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, appreciated. I also have to bulk up the chronicles section but can't read them because they're in French. Would you by chance be able to help there too? If so, I'll try digging for sources and can make them available to you. Truthkeeper (talk) 19:24, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
I found a source in English that's filled one gap, so might be okay. I found one in French that I had no trouble reading (my French is less rusty than I thought) but the source is very dated, so still searching. Anyway, will keep you posted. Busy week ahead, unfortunately. Thanks so much though - that page really needs someone else to take it over. Truthkeeper (talk) 03:28, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for protecting this article. Nash is an artist close to my heart. I grew up at Langley Marish and my parents are buried near his grave. LynwoodF (talk) 10:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
I meant to, and actually did, send a tks email about an hour ago for all the help with fixing my rubbish spelling on the van Eycks. My ISP sucks, plain and simple and its one of those here today gone tomorrow merchants your mother warned you about. Thats my round about way of saying tks gal. I notice the van Eyck page has about 35k hits / month, way more than the main Netherlandish page which clocks in at c 5k. That makes sense, and as the main Netherlandish page is such a big thing to take on, I might confine myself there for the moment, and work on that, but only as a learning board. You on for it it? Only reward i might have is two a penny u tube links, eg some electro [3] from back when electro rocked. Ceoil (talk) 01:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Ah, don't think that came through. That said, I've had a couple of server hiccups here lately (friend got only half an email I sent; still not sure how that happened), so it might not just be you. Sure, I'm up for Van Eyck. It's definitely a more manageable project to take on, and it would also help if we do go on with the Netherlandish page at some point. Interesting that he gets more hits on his own than the general page does. Kafka Liz (talk) 01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Just reading through the article. I think I'm going to need to read up a little on him before I tackle the copy-editing, just to have a better feel for the article. There's a chapter in Snyder book that should do the trick, and I picked up Vasari's Lives not too long ago, though I haven't cracked it yet. Kafka Liz (talk) 02:53, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
About half of whats on the van Eyck bio needs to be gutted; too much of the wedding portrait, which could be moved to that works own article. The bio section I could do fairly easily now from the sources I have, and the innovation, market and legacy stuff also. But not sure where to go after that. His signiture seems a big deal, section on that usre, but thats only going to about a 40kb page. O and I see Riggr is around and saying hello below. Tell him I was asking for him. He's actually a nice guy when you get to know him. But you know he's Canadian, from one of the mountains there[4]. Im rustic myself, but not to the extent that Riggr is. He told me before that he's only met 7 actual people, "so far" he said. Ceoil (talk) 09:53, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
@ Ceoil...Agreed, The whole thing seems a bit... cluttered, if that makes sense. I want to make sure I know what's going on, at lest better than I do at present, before I try to smooth it out. There's a lot of possibly this and maybe that, which I understand is the nature of the subject, and I know we can't pin everything down, but I'd like to come up with something that sound more definitive... and I need to know what's being said currently before I can do that. Kafka Liz (talk) 23:28, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Agree. The best approach might to be say this is whats known, bla bla, this is whats conjecture but generally accepted bla b;a, this is minority view. A lot of whats been written about the wedding portrait is speculative or projection, a similar prob to what we had with Bosch's Garden. Ceoil (talk) 02:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Jesus yes that is embarrasing. <hangs head> Sorry Riggr, sorry internet. By the way Riggr, always nice to see you around sir, even if you are only pointing out my stupidity. Ceoil (talk) 14:28, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
No mention of stupidity. Liz's (incomprehensible yet suggestive) edit summary was funny, as was the degree of the typo. But in the light of a new day, I look like an ass. There is something about Saturday nights... remember those... Riggr Mortis (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I do, the good old days eh? How are things anyway; 5 word summary pls. Things are fairly grim here, although seeing yourself and liz back is nice. Ceoil (talk) 21:27, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
You've been framed
Leaping with Leap Day Anticipation Award
I couldn't think of anything to get you, so I got you this frame. As you can see, it is made by the finest Medieval carpenters. Rumor has it that it once contained a portrait of the original LolCat. Riggr Mortis (talk) 03:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
You mean the LolCat, the one painted by Saint Luke after he got done with that boring Virgin stuff? Doesn't a relic of this magnitude belong in a shrine somewhere? I am honoured indeed! Kafka Liz (talk) 03:25, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Your spelling of "honoured" is curio(u)s(o), for someone who I thought was from where I thought they were from. Me, as a free-thinking Canadian, I just put these u's in when it seems aesthetic; "honour", yes, "neighbour", well, mixed feelings. In this way I have never been captive to the rig'd British or American rules (on any matter, from the taking of wives [6] to how to transfenestrate an Irishman [think of the window as a picture frame, think of the Irishman as Ceoil as a found object, and imagination you're painting a portrait]). [7]Riggr Mortis (talk) 06:48, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
The short answer is I try to keep 'em guessing. The long answer has to do with childhood reading habits and grad school. So the spelling wanders from "British" to American and back again. The other short answer is that I do what looks right to me, as you do, I gather. Do be careful regarding the taking of wives, though [8] . Life is mostly just standing and waiting, sadly. Kafka Liz (talk) 22:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
In a fit of insanity I'm considering working up the Brothers Grimm for the core contest. I thought I'd let you know, in case you're still interested. I'd understand completely if you're fully committed elsewhere - this would be a sprint. I have house guests during that period and a crazy amount of work, but thought if I can sandbox some notes before it begins on March 10th I can at least improve the page somewhat. We'll see. Anyway, would love to have your help. Or if we really wanted to have some wiki torture a bunch of us could pitch in at Vincent van Gogh - that's very tempting to me, but not sure anyone else is interested. Throwing it out anyway to see whether it's soundly shot down. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:20, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Gah... I'm genuinely not sure I can commit to this. I'm not uninterested, but this month's going to be a busy one. I'm not saying no, but I'm not sure I can say yes, either... Kafka Liz (talk) 22:37, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Yeah I thought you might be busy, but since we'd talked about it, although the contest got put off, and I'm thinking about going ahead, thought I'd let you know. Take care. Truthkeeper (talk) 01:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
No, I'm glad you did; I just don't want to say yes and then let you down. I'll try to help when I can, but I have a lot of stuff going on this month. Kafka Liz (talk) 01:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Mildly curious as to motivation, but yeah, not interested enough to go trawling old pages. Re:the diptych, happy to help, as always. I'll try to give it a more thorough read this weekend and start going over it in detail. Kafka Liz (talk) 20:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
a file you uploaded is before Review Panel
While browsing the Commons category "Urinals in the United States" (hey, it's not as bad as what JNW looks at), I came across your contribution... I was wondering if this is an installation piece at the museum of bad art, because if so how can it be bad art if Duchamp did it... or is it just a bathroom? (Combine the two ideas and you get Magritte's "This is not a urinal", I guess.) Riggr Mortis (talk) 02:55, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
It is of educational value, of course. Whether it is an installation or purely utilitarian is, I suggest, a construct. Though perhaps... sometimes a urinal is just a urinal. Kafka Liz (talk) 03:22, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Re:JNW, I recently had a song on my page featuring the lyrics, "I burned my eyed out". I'll allow you to connect what dots there may be. Kafka Liz (talk) 03:24, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
It all came about because I was "watching this space", as you suggested. Still nothing going on, and lest you be one of those bosses who thinks they can ignore labor laws, I am entitled to a urinal break every four hours. Riggr Mortis (talk) 03:31, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Still deciding on the best use for that space. Nature does abhor a vacuum, I am told. If you need to use it for relief (as I am given to understand that you lack facilities), then... well, pictures of the end product are not really required. Kafka Liz (talk) 03:40, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:
Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
I know we are not supposed to like them since it was discovered they eat puffins, but [10], and here is a nice tune to be wrecked to [11]. Its exquisitely French, but pretty cool all the same. Ceoil (talk) 22:46, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
...for the kind words of condolence, and for the beautiful floral image. At this sorrowful time, they touched my soul with warmth, comfort and happiness. I just don't know what to do with myself now - I feel lost. Wesley☀Mouse01:15, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Wesley, I really am sorry to hear this. I lost a close family member myself earlier this year, so I understand all too well how you must be feeling. Please feel free to email me if you need to talk or anything. Take care, and all my best to you and your family, Kafka Liz (talk) 01:25, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Aw, thanks for noticing ;) Yeah, I'll be in & out for a while - as I often am, but this time I see it coming. I'm going to try to help with some stuff this weekend, but the family stuff makes it tricky. Kafka Liz (talk) 17:15, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Lucy Poems
Hi Kafka Liz,
I'm considering making some edits at The Lucy poems, but of course I don't want to tread on anyone's toes and I would like to get some consensus before doing anything bold, although I understand that bold edits are nevertheless within the philosophy of Wikipedia. At any rate, I can't do anything until I get my hands on a copy of Mary Moorman's standard biography, which I don't have to hand and which I haven't looked at in 20 years.
I've put a note expressing my concerns on the Talk page
I'm struck by this remark in the lede:" ... as a series they focus on the poet's longing for the company of his friend Coleridge, who had stayed in England [sic, but that is matter of fact not so], and on his increasing impatience with his sister Dorothy."
In the first place I don't understand the remark. I can't see anything in the Lucy poems that focuses on his absence from Coleridge or his increasing impatience with Dorothy. What can the remark possibly mean?
But more to the point, disregarding his possible frustration over his separation from Coleridge, that William was increasingly impatient with his sister Dorothy flies in the face of all conventional wisdom about the relationship, videlicet that it was an intense, lifelong bond that was never sundered once bother and sister had been reunited after separation in childhood.
I was curious to discover the origin of this remark.
What were your sources, please? You don't cite any.
I do appreciate that Wikipedia operates a relativist consensual verifiability model but nevertheless at issue here is a matter of fact, whether William was impatient with Dorothy or not, and it should be cited if it is to be offered as fact and not opinion as your edit comment suggests.
I see your Ceoil is looking into it, so that's fine. I just think the bit about 'being impatient with Dorothy' really ought to be struck from the lede and mentioned only in connection with the minor "psycho-biography" of the American academic, if at all (I would rather more attention was paid to Bateson's notable and plausible "repressed" theory). DaftOldBat89 (talk) 08:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Miles Romney
I am not really very expert on image use rules, but I see no problem with uploading the images. Just do it, and if there is a problem contact people.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Well, I took them myself in 2009, so the licensing shouldn't be a problem. I just didn't want to overwhelm the article with potentially unwanted images. I thought I'd ask you, since you created the article. I'll upload them then and let you decide. Kafka Liz (talk) 00:19, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Smile!
Hello Kafka Liz, Acalamari has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I think if her tailor was really honest he should haved designed the worlds most fancy paper bag. Of course Philip was not exacly handsome himself. In fact, he should have counted himself very lucky to be allowed out in daylight. Ceoil (talk) 00:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Pure speculation, but Phil was probably a "butter body", let alone a "butter face". Should've just been pleased he was in the market. Kafka Liz (talk) 00:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
If he didnt have an arranged marriage at his disposal, I'd guess he be heavily into the Smiths.[13]. Tied to your mother's apron and that. Ceoil (talk) 00:24, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Cheers for the edits on the van der weyden madonna. Its a pretty funky red number she's wearing, no? We should go back to those days. Now there was elegance. I know the face is idealised to a 600 ye old cannon, but she wouldnt cut it in our local disco, and I suspect you wouldnt "get much" off her. Still though that dress, wow. Ceoil (talk) 08:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
You and the flowing robes, tsk tsk. And God will smite you if you try it on with her. I'm still not quite convinced it's a hood, and not a matching mantle, but yeah, striking. Kafka Liz (talk) 11:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
I suppose I could be questioning your intentions toward the Blessed Mother. I hope they are strictly honourable. Kafka Liz (talk) 11:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
God was there first. Its cool, we have an understanding. No need for [14]. She has it going on, but nothing I've give up my throne for. Ceoil (talk) 12:12, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
I like giving these more than receiving them, so I'm glad you liked it. I have a pretty good idea of how difficult literary FAs are, so this barnstar is certainly well-deserved. I'm not surprised that you haven't noticed me before. I just wish the criteria for the "invisible barnstar" was more literal for my sake. But, in that case, it would either be tough as hell to find awardees or there'd be several million deserving users. ;) I'm going for my own little poetry GA at the moment, though, so wish me luck! INeverCry23:38, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
I have seen you around in passing - on Wilkie Collins and related pages, if I recall correctly - but I've been here a bit sporadically of late. I will try to look in on the Crabbe article... but I am very rusty these days. I do promise not to damage it. In any case, it looks pretty solid from a cursory reading. I'll try to look at it in more depth, for whatever that's worth ;) Kafka Liz (talk) 21:05, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
I've got Collins and his fellow Victorian Elizabeth Gaskell looking somewhat respectable, but nothing near what they both deserve... yet. I've been vacillating on a GAN for Crabbe for quite a while now, but I decided to take a shot once and for all. I usually work on Russian stuff, which is probably why I stay under the radar most of the time. If you ever get a chance, and only if you really feel like it, I'd love to have you take a look at these two articles: Nikolai Leskov & Aleksey Konstantinovich Tolstoy. I tend to think of them as "unofficial" GA articles. ;) INeverCry22:09, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, I don't want to promise anything I can't deliver, but I will certainly try to take a look at all three of these. I don't know if I can be of much help beyond copy-editing (should it be needed), and I'll be the first to admit that I know very little about Russian literature. That said, it's possible that I could help finding unanswered questions that a layperson might wonder about, things that the more informed reader would already know. I'll see what I can do, and I am flattered that you asked. Kafka Liz (talk) 22:24, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
George Crabbe has already received the attention of one of Wadewitz's tp stalkers, and a more grammatically advanced colleague of mine, so hopefully you'll find him agreeable for the most part. In regard to the Russian fellows, just your general opinion would be very helpful; what you think of the layout, length, and especially the referencing, as going through these two "loose baggy monsters" (quoting Henry James's description of War and Peace) would be quite an undertaking. My co-author (User:Evermore2) writes these in Runglish and I translate them into halfway decent English. He's a much better writer than I'll ever be (he did the FA Russian wiki version of Janis Joplin, and quite a few other FAs and GAs over there), so I'm just an assistant of sorts. In any event, don't hurry or otherwise go out of your way; I'm far past the age when folks are in a rush. ;) INeverCry03:24, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, Liz but the black was driving me nuts. You once reverted my page when I had up a black tag and so I'm returning the favor. If you object I won't be offended if you revert. Take care. Truthkeeper (talk) 12:40, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm sad to see the "retired" template (now changed by Truthkeeper88) on your userpage, Kafka Liz. :( I'm not sure of the exact reasons why you're leaving, but I think I probably have a rough idea. You know how to contact me if you ever want to talk. Best wishes. Acalamari12:47, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Don't worry about explaining. I was only concerned about taking the liberty with your page but in all honesty don't blame you at all for going black. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:51, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
I can really understand you being sick of that place, and how ironic that the guy that templated you and got shirty and left in a huff has now been told that he can exercise his constitutional right to template regulars in peace. [15][16] You could not make this stuff up. Babys and bottles. Baa, tossers, children and petulant loosers, this place and the way its going aint worth it, I'll join you soon in wiki oblivion. Ceoil (talk) 22:36, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Not wanting to wake you from your slumber, but TK has only gone and nominated the van eyck at FAC, innit. Facking hell, the daft mare like. I presume your tooled up, cause its on like this shit was christmass. Ceoil (talk) 22:21, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Hey, Liz, I couldn't have planned this if I wanted, but am thrilled that Ceoil added you to the nom and I hope you think about stepping back in. I know what it's like to put up with months of bullying here; I've made a complete ass of myself in the past however months blanking my page again and again because I was fed up. Anyway, you don't want to hear all that, but I do understand why you stepped. We'll probably get crucified at FAC, but am thrilled to have you with us at the crucifixion. <pun intended>. Anyway, take care. P.s didn't mean to be rude re not sending email - simply didn't want you to feel obligated to explain. I understand that feeling too. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:46, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Apology
Hi Liz, I just wanted to apologize for not providing adequate attention to your complaints at my talk page. I did not (and to an extant still don't) understand how bothersome template messages were to some editors. I'm glad to see you're editing again, even if it's just until the diptych passes. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:25, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Crisco, I appreciate the note. The reason most regular editors object to being templated is that it smacks of condescension. It seems to say (and I appreciate that this is not always the templater's intent) that the person addressed doesn't deserve the dignity of an actual comment, that he or she is scarcely worthy of your time. It also makes a basic assumption that the templated person doesn't know or understand the rules of Wikipedia, which is doubly offensive to someone who has been around for a while. So in my opinion, while "Don't Template the Regulars" is not Policy with a capital p, it is a generally accepted standard of behaviour around here, and common courtesy to boot. Please understand that I'm not trying to take you to task here, just trying to explain, since you said you didn't understand.
I can't honestly say whether I'll stick around after the diptych FAC is decided; I'll have to play it by ear. In any event, I do appreciate your note and hope we can put this behind us. Peace, Kafka Liz (talk) 23:05, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the explanation. I have at times used templates as they are generally more politically-worded than I think I can handle. As for staying on... I don't doubt you'll do what is right. Peace. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
We done it! Nice working with you once again. Would be good to see the star on your page if ever restored. I donna wanna drag you back in, godfather style, but you should leave your page showing what you did here. Your missed. Ceoil (talk) 06:14, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Liz, I agree with Ceoil. At least put the page back temporarily and add the star - then take it down again. Or put up a wikibreak tag. I'm about to go out on break myself, or put up a busy tag or something, because I'm really too busy at this time of year to edit much. After the holidays I'd like to get the Grimm page to FAC so if you're interested I could use a keen eye there - I think the page still needs work, gaps to be filled in and such. Truthkeeper (talk) 12:12, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Well... I'll give it a shot with the page. Re: Grimm, I don't have any useful sources to hand at the moment. I would like to say yes, but I've a lot on my plate at the moment IRL. That said, much of it should have cleared up by the holidays. Long story short, if I'm around, I'd be happy to lend a hand. I'll try at least to give the page a read over the weekend. Kafka Liz (talk) 16:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
I don't have any sources either - all gone back to the library. I don't expect to do much on this article until after Christmas, and I'll need to re-order the books then from ILL. It's a tricky page because each brother has his own page, so this one is a summary, but I'm not sure it's right and could use another set of eyes. If you're interested in coming back, would love the feedback, but no pressure at all! In the meantime, hope you have a nice Thanksgiving. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:15, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi JNW, My apologies for the delayed response. I'm just seeing this now...and also noticing that I'd disabled email. It should be on now - sorry about that. Best, Kafka Liz (talk) 16:08, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Kafka Liz. 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.
