User talk:Corinne/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5 ← Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15

Juliette and Rodolphe Wytsman

Hafs I found a nice painting by Herman Richir of Juliette and Rodolphe Wytsman and put it at the top of my talk page. I see that there is an article about Rodolphe Wytsman but no article on either Herman Richir or Juliette Wytsman. Do you feel like writing articles on them? Also, I saw that in the article on Rodolphe Wytsman, this painting of the couple is not there. It would be a good likeness of the artist, wouldn't it? This painting and one other are mentioned in that article in "Trivia", which I think is a silly name for a section. Maybe you could find the other painting, too. CorinneSD (talk) 00:30, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Sure, yes, why not. Hafspajen (talk) 01:07, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
I saw that the article was not written in Standard English, so I did my best to put it into Standard English. There were just one or two sentences where I was not sure. (I haven't yet finished; will continue tomorrow.) CorinneSD (talk) 01:13, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
I worked on putting the article into Standard English; still have more to do. There's one sentence that I don't know what to do with. Also, can you translate the caption in the one image in the article? Finally, don't you think it would be good to add more images to this article? CorinneSD (talk) 16:18, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Hafspajen Hafs, did you get the ping at the beginning of this section? I've done as much as I can. The article was really not well written, and I've worked hard to put it into English. There are a few sentences here and there that I just could not figure out, so I left the sentences as they were; perhaps you can look at the original text and figure out what they are supposed to say, such as:
In the second paragraph of Rodolphe Wytsman#Exhibitions, it mentions "1908 Belgischer Art Exhibition in Berlin". I tried to find some information about this exhibition just to confirm the name of it in English but couldn't find any.
After the section on the First World War, I just gave up. I need you or User:Sca to find the original text and put it into English. CorinneSD (talk) 23:10, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Noted. Sca (talk) 01:09, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Re dashes spaced or not — this is not a style I've ever worked with. I shall desist from em-dashes henceforth but I'm afraid you'll have to replace the ones I've so outrageously added.
Am working on Wytsman and also working up an ed's note for you. Sca (talk) 16:50, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Sca, if you like em-dashes, that's fine. They're all right. Just don't put spaces around them. In fact, because I see you like them, I'll change them all to unspaced em-dashes. CorinneSD (talk) 16:54, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Einverstanden. Sca (talk) 17:02, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
What's that? CorinneSD (talk) 17:11, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. Sca (talk)

Editing note

The Wystman article was translated from Flemish (Dutch).

I can generally make out simple Dutch due to my German and to the fact that I lived in Holland for a few months long ago (early '70s), and of course there's always Bing. I went through the article and revised some awkward translations, condensing here & there to delete superfluous details, such as Wytsman's four street addresses in Brussels. I dropped urbanist from the 2nd graf cuz I couldn't find a suitable translation; I thought of rendering it as "town planner" but that doesn't fit the context.

There are still too many names of minor artists and fellow art students in the article. Of the latter I dopped L. Cambier, Julien Dillen, Leon Herbo, Henri Permeke, L. Pion, F. Seghers and François Taelemans, as they seem to have no further significance. Also the others who joined later: Vela others[clarification needed] joined Albert Baertsoen, Frantz Charlet, Jean Degreef, Henry De Groux, Jacques Lalang, Jean Delville, James Ensor, Leon Frederic, Frank Leemputten and others. Superfluous for English readers.

This quote — J'espère que tout en n'étant plus Vingtiste, nous conserverons nos bons rapports et le plaisir que j'aurai de vous recevoir souvent à l'atelier — and its translation don't add materially to the story; briefly paraphrased.

I question the utility of the graf listing works Wytsman exhibited at Les XX, especially since we don't get to see them. But, if you're going to retain that section, the titles should be translated from French (and italicized — not quotes).

Deleted the next graf about his addresses — superfluous.

Re Rik Wouters, got of cancer from the Dutch article; seems he had "eye cancer." — ??

To me the article, which started at 2,000 words and is now down to 1,500, still seems a bit long for a relatively obscure artist, few of whose works are available on Commons. But ... whatever. Sca (talk) 17:45, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

PS: I'd forgotten to edit the graf headed Style. Done. Sca (talk) 18:18, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
PPS: CorinneSD, Fine-tuned text, added two pix and, on talk page, a note re revision. Let me know what you think of the results. Sca (talk) 22:17, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Sca, really excellent work. I'm glad you added two more images. I had wondered about "Juliette" with an umlaut. I saw one or two instances of it and thought it might be a Belgian or Flemish spelling, so I left it and changed the other instances of it. I'm sure you were right, though, in deleting the umlaut. I'd like to ask you about one sentence. It's the second sentence in the section Rodolphe Wytsman#Style:
  • They were both driven to a great interest in depicting the effects of intense light in their paintings.
I was puzzled by the preposition "to" after "They were both driven". "Driven to an interest"? Not "driven by an interest"? CorinneSD (talk) 00:03, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
P.S. You didn't have to go into such detail in telling me what you had done; I looked at your edits carefully, and there was really no need for me to do even that -- they're all good. CorinneSD (talk) 00:04, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Make it 'by' — better.
Umlauts aren't understood by most English speakers, and usually aren't used in English. "Juliette" is a name known in English. Sca (talk) 00:58, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
PS: If you'd like, I can give you my high school German teacher's instructions on how to pronounce an umlaut. Sca (talk) 01:01, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Mencken

I don't see a prob w/the two links to Sinclair Lewis.

BTW, my current read is Main Street. Of course it paints a rather negative picture of small-town life in Minn. (my home state) a century ago, but the descriptions and character development are good. As you may know, the town it's set in, Gopher Prairie, was based on Sauk Centre, Lewis's hometown. It didn't win him much love there when it was published in 1920, but nowadays they advertise themselves as his birthplace, etc. Figgers. Sort of like Bob Dylan and Hibbing. Sca (talk) 18:00, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Milestone

Rothorpe I can't believe it. I was trying to keep track of my edits so that I would see when I made my 10,000th edit, and I just looked and saw that I had gone right past it today -- it's at 10,022. I wonder how many of those are just adding or removing a comma. CorinneSD (talk) 00:34, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, congratulations. Most people don't notice the comma edits, but we know how important they are. Rothorpe (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

FP?

Wytsman: Rural Scene

Perhaps you'd like to nominate Plattelandsgezicht for an FP? It's big enough — 1,674 X 1,282 px.

I rather like the sky. Sca (talk) 14:47, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
PS: Congrats on 10,000th! After reading the above, I checked mine for the first time — I'm not far behind: 9,244. Don't think I'll catch up, tho — you are too busy.... Sca (talk) 14:59, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Sca, thank you! CorinneSD (talk) 21:23, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Artist articles with no images

Hafspajen Hafs, I'm looking for images to nominate at FP. I started by looking at some artists in the Lists of painters by nationality, then going to List of American artists 1900 and after. I looked at the article on Isabel Bishop saw the article had no images of her work. Can you find something?

American artist articles with no images of works

That's all for now... CorinneSD (talk) 22:52, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

I also want to ask you what you think of Sca's suggestion, above, that I nominate the image from the Rodolphe Wytsman article (image is copied above). While I can't say I love it, I like it, but I'd like your opinion. CorinneSD (talk) 21:22, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Ok, will look today. Hafspajen (talk) 07:46, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Can't. All images USED on Wiki has to have free copyright. These artist just recently died, like Clarence Holbrook Carter (March 26, 1904 – June 4, 2000) These above are not artist whose works are free. That goes for all, List of American artists 1900 and after... Because all artworks are free 70 years AFFTER the artis died, but not before. Try to look at artist like that, I mean decesed for 70 years ago, or more. Hafspajen (talk) 14:45, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh... (I just saw this.) O.K. Thanks. CorinneSD (talk) 00:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
About the image, well, I don't know what to say. The point is that you should LIKE the image yourself. It would't be my choice. And it should be 1500x1500 minimum. It's only 1,674 × 1,282. So I don't think it will make it anyway. Hafspajen (talk) 00:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I mean - we need you as you are. With your special ways of looking at things, discovering them and liking them. Exactly like you are. We need what you can contribute with - that we the others can't discover or notice. I don't really know if I succeeded to make myself clear here. All the pictures you nominated were your own choice - except from that blasted pastor, but that was a misunderstanding. And never made it anyway. Just trust yourself. Hafspajen (talk) 12:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
O.K. Thank you. CorinneSD (talk) 17:24, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Formatting question

I was trying to find out on MOS:TITLES how the title of a Ph.D. thesis should be formatted in an article -- italics or quotation marks -- but I couldn't find anything. Can you tell me? Thanks. CorinneSD (talk) 22:09, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello, personally I would treat it as a minor work and use double quotation marks if it has a specific title you're referring to, or use nothing at all if you refer to by a generic title. But that's just my interpretation! Alex J Fox(Talk)(Contribs) 22:24, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Alex - It's in Seymour Lipton. Both the book title and the thesis title were in regular (Roman) font, so I put both in italics. I guess I'd better put the thesis title in quotation marks now. CorinneSD (talk) 22:55, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Dash away, dash away...

Congrats, you've converted me to spaced en-dashes. Sca (talk) 21:58, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year CorinneSD!

Happy New Year!

CorinneSD,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Hafspajen (talk) 10:47, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.
Hafspajen Thank you so much for this. I don't know where to find these holiday templates. I took a little break from WP. I'm so happy to see you and Sca have mended fences. Happy New Year to you. I hope 2015 is a great year for you. Best wishes, CorinneSD (talk) 18:00, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Dear Corinne,
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! A new year has come! How times flies! 2015 will be a new year, and it is also a chance for you to start afresh! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--Fylbecatulous talk 12:56, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

This message promotes WikiLove. Created by Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook). To use this template, leave {{subst:User:Nahnah4/Happy New Year}} on someone else's talk page.

Wishing you all the best. I never answered about my favourite tea. Darjeeling. Sending some from a very cold location today. ツ Fylbecatulous talk 12:56, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Fylbecatulous Thanks so much for thinking of me! How are you doing? Happy New Year to you, too. I hope 2015 is an excellent year for you. I like Darjeeling, too. Do you like any others? It's cold here, too. Brrr! CorinneSD (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

At last...

Corinne, you might be interested in this. Sca (talk) 14:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

PS: BTW, in the process I added this to the Chief Joseph article:
In 2000, the University of Washington Press published Merrill Beal's I Will Fight No More Forever: Chief Joseph and the Nez Perce War, which was received positively regionally and nationally.
If you have any interest in such topics, it's excellent. Happy New Year to you too! Sca (talk) 18:19, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

HAPPY NEW YEAR Corinne!!!

Sminthopsis84 (talk) 20:03, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
.
.
.
.
A hand-made greeting since the template seems to be broken.

I broke your talk page!

So sorry! I backed out what I did, but that didn't solve the problem. (Then I added a hand-made greeting.) It looks as if New Year 2015 greetings added after a certain time aren't working, and furthermore that previous ones on the same page stop working. Just a suspicion, but I wonder if the problem could be related to this change made by @Technical 13: at 13:34 UTC today. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 20:08, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

That diff doesn't look fine to me, the picture of the fireworks doesn't appear. It had been vandalized at commons, but I don't think that was the problem with your test case. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 20:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Special:Diff/640421279 shows you adding it to this page and everything looks fine there too. Maybe it was a local issue on your end? — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 20:16, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
However, fixing the vandalism at Commons correlates with the fireworks working here once again, and on the template itself. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 20:30, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Sminthopsis84 Thank you for the hand-made greeting! It's beautiful! I guess I missed all this. Just saw it now. I guess the problem has been fixed. Happy New Year to both of you (that is, Sminth and Technical 13). CorinneSD (talk) 00:49, 1 January 2015 (UTC)


Cucurbita at FAC

It is finally there! Your input and review would be greatly appreciated. I can never thank you enough for helping me all you have. The main reason I got serious about editing was to improve this article. HalfGig talk 00:23, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

HalfGig, That's great news! I'd be glad to take a look at it. I know you've been working on it. I hope this is just the first of many articles you'll write or work to improve. I'd like to wish you a Happy New Year. I hope 2015 is a good year for you. Best wishes, CorinneSD (talk) 00:44, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Sminthopsis84 HalfGig Is this where I should leave comments? [1] CorinneSD (talk) 00:56, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes. HalfGig talk 01:03, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Rothorpe I've been commenting on Cucurbita at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cucurbita/archive1#Comments from CorinneSD. I want to know which word you prefer, crawl or extend. See my comments about the section Cucurbita#Description. First I suggested "crawl". Then I changed my mind and suggested "extend". HalfGig changed it to "extend". Now I'm wondering, so I'm asking you. You know how squash grows in long horizontal stems along the ground. Was I right that "extend" is more elegant? CorinneSD (talk) 03:49, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, and more academic, as you say. Babies and animals crawl; plants are more sneaky. Rothorpe (talk) 04:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Your edits to Nutmeg

You were quite right in your reversions/fixes to Nutmeg; I should have been bolder. Happy New Year! Peter coxhead (talk) 18:49, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
The Teamwork Barnstar is awarded when several editors work together to improve an article. Thanks for your edits! Hafspajen (talk) 07:44, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!

CorinneSD, I wish you a Happy New Year, and thank you for the good cooperation in the past as also in the future. Beagel (talk) 12:10, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Beagel, thank you so much! Happy New Year to you, too. CorinneSD (talk) 18:48, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

What

do you think about this edit ? and this-this- fruits or fruit. Hafspajen (talk) 15:41, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

The first one is correct. "Austrian beers" is plural, so the correct form of the verb is "come".

Regarding the palinka article, you will have seen by now that I made quite a few minor copy-edits and re-wordings. The decision as to whether it should be "fruit" or "fruits" was made on a case-by-case basis. Most of the time, the word should be "fruit". Only when it means "a variety of different kinds of fruit", collectively, should it be "fruits". CorinneSD (talk) 19:50, 3 January 2015 (UTC) Ah. Right. Thanks. I looked at this artist - the Spanish one - he has only two pictures on Commons. It looks to me that he ismaking fun of those monks. Hafspajen (talk) 20:13, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I did. I looked at each one. I'm sorry, I should have said so. I saw that your edits were mainly to the images. Since I don't know how to see what image was there before you substituted a new one (I wish I did know how to do this), and even if I did, I would trust your judgment anyway, I guess that's why I didn't say anything. I have a question. The caption to one of the images looks like it's partly in French and partly in English. It reads, "Bosquet des bains d'Appolon in Versailles". Couldn't this be translated into English? What's "bosquet"? Woods? Garden? ...of the baths of Appolon (Apollo?) in Versailles. Something like that. Also, there's one image, in the section Water garden#Water follies, with the caption "Tea-pavilion in Mannheim", that looks a little odd to me. I know it's meant to illustrate a small waterfall, but, as the photo is taken from behind the falls, it just doesn't show much except the black background and the water. I should think a photo taken from outside the cavern, looking at the waterfall in its setting, would be a nicer image. That's just my opinion. CorinneSD (talk) 23:12, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Hafs...did you read this reply to your question? CorinneSD (talk) 00:47, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Well, I guess I am a bit less interested of captions than pictures. The word "bosquet" is a grove of trees - but also a special expression in landscape architecture, for especially composed groups of trees especially of the French Baroque garden architecture. The type like the Versailles. Andre le Notre was a great master of this. The of the baths of Appolon (Apollo?) in Versailles is correct. Hafspajen (talk) 12:24, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

This is how it looked like before - the pictures were quite boring. Replaced the water folly pic. Thanks for checking it. Hafspajen (talk) 12:29, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Hey, we don't have an article on water follies... Hafspajen (talk) 12:30, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

?

Why would anyone like to delete this?Hafspajen (talk) 00:15, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen Hafs, you didn't sign this comment, but I figured out it was you. Well, I took a look. I wouldn't be able to judge what others said was duplication of material already in other articles without spending quite a bit of time reading those articles, but I saw right away that the writing was poor. I voted to delete and provided three examples of the poor writing. CorinneSD (talk) 00:07, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

well, I guess the answer is you would. Hafspajen (talk) 00:15, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Why, did you think it was a good article? Did you write the article? If you think it is a good article, why don't you vote to keep it? CorinneSD (talk) 00:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't know what to think of it. And it has four delete aklready. Hafspajen (talk) 22:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Perfect aspect in American English

Hello, Corinne. At the end of the 3rd paragraph of Bill de Blasio#Early life and education, I'm inclined to put a 'had' in: 'revealed that his father had committed suicide'. But would you? I've noticed AmE uses the perfect, including in the past, much less than BrE does. Sorry if I've mentioned this before, but you know what a poor memory I have. Rothorpe (talk) 22:01, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, first, I'm puzzled that you would say AmE uses present perfect tense less than BrE does. I think the difference is only in past perfect. I agree -- I've heard (and seen) past perfect less and less recently. I don't know if it's because Americans generally are not well-trained in grammar and writing or it it reflects a genuine change in the language (or both). Personally, I have added "had" to the verb many times as I've edited on WP (and, of course, try to use past perfect). In this case, of course it should be "had committed", and if I were editing the article, I probably would add "had", but since the writer of the article didn't think to put the verb in past perfect, I'll bet many readers won't notice the missing "had". In this particular sentence, I suppose it doesn't sound too awfully bad with past tense. I think it's just a matter of whether you want to bother. Thanks for asking. CorinneSD (talk) 22:59, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for the late reply, I forgot to watch this page. I agree with your analysis (and doubt) and will change it. I'll let you know next time I see an example of past tense where a Brit would use present perfect (or if I think of a well-known example). Thanks! Rothorpe (talk) 02:14, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
I can never resist a discussion about grammar! I don't think you do need the perfect here, regardless of the ENGVAR. The perfect conveys information on the time relationship relative to an established reference point. If this point is in the past, then the past prefect is used, and so on. So I think there would be agreement on something like "By the time he was born, his father had committed suicide." The temporal relationship between the two events is a key point being conveyed. But in "He revealed that his father committed suicide" the temporal relationsip between the revelation and the suicide isn't at issue. We know that the suicide was before he revealed it. The focus is on the suicide, not when it was. Compare "He revealed that the cause of his father's death was suicide." We can write "He revealed that the cause of his father's death had been suicide", but I don't think you can say that one is right and the other wrong. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:32, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes... What do you think of using the past tense with 'already'? Rothorpe (talk) 03:01, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I've got to answer User:Rothorpe and then reply to User:Peter coxhead. I assume that you mean in general, not in a specific place in that article. If you're asking in general, I think using the past tense with "already" is fine. We use it all the time: Did you change the order of the sections? Yes, I already did that. (most common) OR: Yes, I did that already. OR: Yes, I've already done that. OR: Yes, I've done that already. Even though present perfect (last two examples) may be slightly more correct, the past tense is quicker to say, so it's used more. There may also be a slight difference in time. To me, one would use the past tense for something completed a while ago, even if only half an hour ago, and present perfect for something completed a very short time ago, such as in the last ten minutes.
In reply to User:Peter coxhead, I also love a good discussion about grammar, so I'm sorry to say that I don't agree with you. I think the past perfect is required when mentioning either two events in the past (including when the more recent event is just saying something) or an event in the past that took place before a specific time in the past, with the past perfect used for the event further back in time, and that this applies even when the other event or the specific time is not specifically mentioned in the same sentence; it could have been mentioned in the previous sentence or it could just be understood. It's just that it's one event mentioned in relation to another event or a specific time (in the past). We agree on that. But you went on to say, "But in 'He revealed that his father committed suicide,' the temporal relationsip between the revelation and the suicide isn't at issue." The way I see it, because we can assume, logically, that the father committed suicide before the son spoke about it (but in order to assume that one has to think about it) is not a reason not to use past perfect tense for the earlier event. It's kind of the other way around: using the past perfect for the earlier event makes it absolutely clear to the reader that it took place before the son spoke about it (which is the later of the two events). There will then be no possibility that a reader or listener could think that the other event (father committing suicide) took place at the same time that the son revealed it. The use of the two tenses removes any ambiguity or confusion. It makes comprehension while reading or listening easier. In the example we're discussing, I think it should be, "He revealed that his father had committed suicide." We know that the revealing took place in the past and the father's committing suicide happened before that. To me, it becomes informal writing if one uses past tense ("committed") instead of past perfect ("had committed") there. In the other sentence you gave, "He revealed that the cause of his father's death was suicide," past tense ("was") is correct. I'm not sure why, but I think it's because "the cause...was suicide" is not an action. It's not because "was" is the verb to be, though: in "He revealed that he had been rude to the shopkeeper," the verb in the noun clause is also the verb be but needs to be in past perfect. Maybe it's because "had been rude to" implies some type of action? CorinneSD (talk) 02:03, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, you've explained it very well. I would add that the simple past to my ears suggest a repeated action or a continuing state: "he revealed that his father committed crimes on a regular basis", reporting the present simple "My father commits..."
As for 'already' with the past, that's American: Brits traditionally use only the perfect, so any amount-in-the-past distinction is not made. Rothorpe (talk) 03:19, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
@CorrineSD: so we agree that there's no fixed rule that the reported verb has to be changed from the past to the past perfect; the semantics of the reported verb matter (action vs state certainly seems one factor). (In some state cases the past isn't always needed: "Copernicus wrote that the Earth goes round the Sun".) So the question becomes prescription versus description. Google ngrams are a little tricky to use here, because we really need a longer string than the maximum 5 words, but if we compare "said he committed suicide" with "said he had committed suicide", both are going to be reports of "he committed suicide" not "he commits suicide". There aren't many results, but they do suggest that both forms are actually used: results. I think it's because of the state-like aspect to any kind of death. The most state-like is just "died": "said he died" is more common than "said he had died". "John said 'My father died last week.'" → "John said his father died last week." Do you need "had" here? I don't. You can of course say that the form without "had" seems informal to you; I can only say that it doesn't to me.
@Rothorpe: committing a crime differs crucially from committing suicide: it can be repeated or not. So we need to choose the tense and aspect of the report carefully to ensure this distinction is made. My contention is that when the distinction doesn't exist, as in cases involving death, English speakers have more freedom to choose stylistic variants. Peter coxhead (talk) 19:06, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
'He said he committed suicide' just sounds wrong (or American) to me, precisely because it's unrepeatable, whereas 'He said he committed suicide last week' sounds American; I still want to include the 'had', but admit it's not necessary. Rothorpe (talk) 21:48, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Landscape

Dear CorinneSD I'm rather busy at the moment, bur will add Landscape to my watch list, and will try to contribute. All the best for 2015.Rwood128 (talk) 01:23, 6 January 2015 (UTC)


Re your recent query re style on 'Literature and landscape', see my comment on User talk:Rothorpe (I'm still in the process of editing this section of Landscape). Rwood128 (talk) 19:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC).

One Hundred and One Dalmatians

Charles Edouard Boutibonne La Préférée

One Hundred and One Dalmatians say that is not up to wiki standards, but it is a rather old tagg, since 2009 or so. What do you think about it? I tried to add some refs. Hafspajen (talk) 18:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

What an incredible painting! CorinneSD (talk) 15:18, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

A Ruszczyc, what a name, really. Hafspajen (talk) 00:25, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Christopher Columbus

This one

,

Hafs Are you following the edits regarding an image at Christopher Columbus? CorinneSD (talk) 16:25, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, I am. Do you remember that article I re-gigged for you? You should wait a week .... now that week has gone. Hafspajen (talk) 00:23, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
No. I've been working on so many articles that I don't remember. Can you give me a clue? CorinneSD (talk) 00:25, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
This one, you said you liked it. Hafspajen (talk) 00:26, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

I can't even view it. It filled up my entire screen. CorinneSD (talk) 00:28, 9 January 2015 (UTC) forgot the : , sorry. Hafspajen (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

But it looked certainly excuisite at close-up. Hafspajen (talk) 00:31, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Well, I could certainly see the brushstrokes. ;) CorinneSD (talk) 00:33, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Now it's not there at all. CorinneSD (talk) 00:31, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Hafs? CorinneSD (talk) 00:36, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

YEES? Sorry, it was late here. Hafspajen (talk) 10:40, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
If you like it, go ahead and nominate. Hafspajen (talk) 18:04, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Word count

Is there an easy way to determine the number of words in a selected paragraph or section? CorinneSD (talk) 16:52, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Nothing official. There may possibly be user scripts, and there's a request to include it in mediawiki software itself, but that hasn't happened yet. For now it may be easiest to copy-paste the section or paragraph into an online word counter. Huon (talk) 19:31, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
O.K. Thank you. CorinneSD (talk) 20:22, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Hi Corinne. I haz an answer . ツ Word Counter. (click here). Very easy to use: just copy and paste.

As a bonus, it also gives a character count.

Arbitration Requests Case Header. Go to this page. They have a quite strict limit on a 500 word use. So if this word counter is exact enough for this esteemed body, it shoud be quite fine for whatever use you wish. The tool is also linked from the ARBCOM page with the lock, if you wish to watchlist it to find again.

All the best. Fylbecatulous talk 20:45, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Fylbecatulous! Both will come in handy. CorinneSD (talk) 20:52, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

No-break hyphen

I learned about a code for a no-break hyphen a while ago. I keep it handy at the top of my talk page. It's ‑. I just used it in the article Landscape where I added it before suffixes after noticing that it was breaking between the hyphen and the suffix at the end of lines. However, this no-break hyphen is shorter than a regular hyphen and is hard to see, and it's important to see the hyphen before a suffix. I suppose there may be some uses in which this shorter hyphen may be needed, but is there any way to create a no-break hyphen that is the same length as the regular hyphen? -- a puzzle for techies. CorinneSD (talk) 18:49, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

I think what you're looking for is not a non-breaking hyphen, since ‑ is indeed identical in width to the regular hyphen ‐, but a non-breaking en-dash or em-dash (or possibly a non-breaking hyphen-minus). I rather doubt non-breaking duplicates of all those exist, but you can use the {{nowrap}} template to prevent breaking: {{nowrap|non-breaking}} will give "non-breaking", which indeed does not break. Huon (talk) 19:50, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, Huon. If I may ask you to look again carefully at the two hyphens you provided in your reply after the word "since", I think you will see that the first one is shorter (left-to-right) than the second one. There is a very small, but observable, difference. Regarding the nowrap|non-breaking template, will that work when there is a space or open quotation marks before the hyphen? I'm trying to make sure that "-ship" does not break between the hyphen and the word ship. I couldn't figure out how to use the nowrap template with that. CorinneSD (talk) 20:15, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't see that they're of different width. I just looked at several of them at the greatest magnification my browser will provide, with no perceptible difference. Note that the second one is not the standard "minus-hyphen" you get via the minus key on your keyboard, but a hyphen I copy-pasted from the hyphen article. Anyway, {{nowrap|-ship}} should guarantee that there's no break between the dash (and here it's just the standard minus-hyphen, not a true hyphen) and the syllable. Try to break this: -ship Huon (talk) 20:30, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
O.K. Thanks. CorinneSD (talk) 20:39, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Blasted setence

It has acquired an important place in the history of art as a German icon of national painting. is this any correct English? Doesn't sounds right somehow. Hafspajen (talk) 19:10, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, grammatically it's all right, but it could be worded better. I'd need to ask a few questions to clarify it:

1) Has [the painting] acquired an important place in the history of world art or only in the history of German art?

2) I don't really know what "national painting" means. That sounds kind of silly.

If it really is supposed to be "a German icon", then it is an icon only to Germans (unless "icon" is taken in the literal meaning of a religious icon), which would make "has acquired an important place in [world] art" unlikely, so the last phrase, "a German icon of national painting", should probably be:

  • an icon of German painting.

So, re-worded, the sentence should probably read:

"It has acquired an important place in the history of world art as an icon of German painting."

Even then, I wonder whether "icon" is the best word there. I suppose art historians would find it acceptable. CorinneSD (talk) 19:25, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

It might be the right word though. Goethe in the Roman Campagna. Hafspajen (talk) 19:31, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

I mean it is a German icon. In art history. Hafspajen (talk) 19:36, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but "a German icon" does not make as much sense as "an icon of German painting". CorinneSD (talk) 19:38, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

That's what I thought too. Can you put together a normal sentence? Hafspajen (talk) 19:48, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
I already did. It's right there, after "So, re-worded, the sentence should probably read:". CorinneSD (talk) 20:08, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
  • What's missing is: that it is a national painting - I mean it was a symbol of the German united countries, a symbol of national unity. Hafspajen (talk) 21:39, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
O.K. Has the painting acquired an important place in art history because it represents German unity? That's a political reason. Or because it's an important painting in German art history? If you read the Wiktionary definitions of icon at [2], I think you'll agree that we're talking about Definition 3: "a thing that is the best example of a certain profession or some doing [endeavor]". So, if the icon is a painting, it's got to be "the best example" of a certain type of painting, or a certain period in painting, or the painting of a particular nation. Are you saying this painting "acquired an important place in art history" because it is a symbol of German political unity (or of German national unity)? That seems to me to be an unusual reason for importance in art history. But if that really is the reason, then I would say just that. "National painting" doesn't really mean much by itself. CorinneSD (talk) 00:05, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Vertumnus

Hafspajen I was looking at the latest edit to Attis, an article I had read about a year ago, when I read a sentence that made me think of the Vertumnus (painting) painting. It is early in the the lede:

  • Attis was also a Phrygian god of vegetation, and in his self-mutilation, death, and resurrection he represents the fruits of the earth, which die in winter only to rise again in the spring.

I wonder if Archimboldo had this in mind when he painted "Vertumnus". I don't know what it would have to do with Rudolf II, though, other than possibly hinting that the emperor was like a god. CorinneSD (talk) 19:29, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Sorry, thought this was your response on Goethe. The idea of ressurection is very - iconic - so to say. There are dusins of deities with this motive. Hafspajen (talk) 19:30, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
The idea was ... add to article what. Hafspajen (talk) 19:47, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

No, I wasn't suggesting adding to any article. I just thought there seemed to be some common features between Attis and the painting. I had forgotten the content of the article on the god Vertumnus, which I must have read five or six weeks ago, but after I posted this comment, I read the entire article on Vertumnus, and, even though it says Vertumnus was an ancient Etruscan god, he was similar to Attis. I think, even though it doesn't say it, that the Etruscan god might have come from the cult of Attis. The two gods could have arisen independently; they're both gods of agriculture, orchards, and the seasons -- probably very ancient. CorinneSD (talk) 20:14, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

But I added it to Vertumnus (painting). Hafspajen (talk) 21:36, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Added what? You mean you added the image of the painting to the V painting article? I know. I wasn't referring to that. I was just sharing some thoughts with you. CorinneSD (talk) 22:47, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Explanation about the Golden Age. If you have read Vertumnus (painting) a couple of hours ago, it's not the same article any more. Hafspajen (talk) 23:15, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Oh... I just read it, and what you added is good. I just made a few minor edits and fixed two links. CorinneSD (talk) 23:54, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Arthur Devis (1712–1787)

Hafs Earlier this afternoon I was looking at all the images in the article Arthur Devis (1712–1787). I noticed that the third painting in the gallery is one painting of a tryptych. I'm wondering if it wouldn't be nice to have all three parts of the tryptych, in the order in which they are normally displayed. What do you think? CorinneSD (talk) 23:53, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Do you really want to know? 23:54, 9 January 2015 (UTC)Hafspajen (talk)

OK, explain. The article is very small. one has to chose from a big amount paintings. I tryed to put thewm together so I

  • 1)use as much as possible the good google files.
  • 2)chose as many subjects as possible for a limited gallery.
  • 3)noticed they are a tryptic. if the article was bigger we could add at least 5 more. Hafspajen (talk) 00:01, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Wanted to add these too, but somewhere I have to say stop. I chosed the best male pics, best woman, group and free open air group - and the one that matched, the ones that fitted and were goole files. .

Hafspajen (talk) 00:08, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

O.K. I see you've put a lot of thought into it. The thing that got me really looking at the image was the fact that the caption starts Mr.... (and she's a woman). Is there any way to just have her name, "Mrs. Peter Duncane", or "Mary, nee Norris, wife of Mr. Peter Duncane" ? CorinneSD (talk) 00:37, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Gosh. It is Mrs, of course. Hafspajen (talk) 01:07, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Landscape painting

Hafs I assume you've been following the discussion at Talk:Landscape#Landscape ecology. In the latest comment Rwood128 provided the definition of landscape from the article in Landscape ecology. I thought it might be interesting to compare that to the definition of landscape written by art historians. I was reading the beginning of the article on Landscape painting and I saw this sentence:

  • Landscape painting, also known as landscape art, is the depiction in art of landscapes, natural scenery such as mountains, valleys, trees, rivers, and forests, and especially art where the main subject is a wide view, with its elements arranged into a coherent composition.

There's something here that is not clear:

  • Landscape painting...is the depiction in art of landscapes,... and especially art.

I know the sentence continues, but this part ought to make sense, and it doesn't quite make sense. What exactly was meant by "and especially art"? CorinneSD (talk) 00:48, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

  • You are right, especially art is superfluous. Hafspajen (talk) 01:05, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
HAFS Would it make sense to leave in the word "especially"? And leave out "and"? (I've crossed them out in the definition, above.) Also, I assume that what immediately follows "the depiction in art of landscapes" is a kind of definition of "landscapes". If I am correct, I think it would be clearer if I changed the comma after "landscapes" to an en-dash. With these minor changes, the sentence would read:
  • Landscape painting, also known as landscape art, is the depiction in art of landscapes – natural scenery such as mountains, valleys, trees, rivers, and forests, especially where the main subject is a wide view – with its elements arranged into a coherent composition.
Just an afterthought: as I read this, I realize that this definition does not include the elements of an urban landscape -- a city with buildings, streets, cars, buses, trucks, etc. What do you think about that? CorinneSD (talk) 01:18, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't know. Cityscape ... maybe in the ordinary way of defining landscape is not landscape? Hafspajen (talk) 01:59, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

And it would it make sense to leave in the word "especially" and leave out "and". Hafspajen (talk) 02:00, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

To ceiase

When using the term "to cease fire", is it "I'm ceasing fire" or "ceazing fire"? With other words: "s" or "z", in the "active verb"? Bets regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:09, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, definitely "s". But this verb is rarely used like that. Maybe, "They're going to cease firing", not "fire". Compare to: "Please cease interrupting", "Cease disturbing the neighborhood", "Cease your squabbling", "Cease and desist". Where have you seen "to cease fire"? Usually it's a noun phrase: "a cease-fire". CorinneSD (talk) 15:57, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Is there a general for s/z in the middle of a word, for example "to prophetiz(s)e"? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 03:54, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
The choice between using an "s" or a "z" in words such as "organisation" vs. "organization" is a distinction between some British spellings and American English spelling. See this article: American and British English spelling differences, particularly this section American and British English spelling differences#Greek-derived spellings. Within American English, if the verb is spelled with a "z", the noun will be, too: to organize, organization. If the verb is spelled with an "s", the noun will be, too: to fantasize, fantasy. At this moment, I can't think of any word where an "s" in one form changes to a "z" in another form of the same word. I'll have to think about that. Rothorpe Can you? I'm not sure about British spelling. CorinneSD (talk) 17:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
You're right. I made a list of examples at Citizendium: [3], about 3/4 of the way down. British tends to prefer the S forms, but there's Oxford spelling, which likes the Z. Usage is consistent across noun and verb. Rothorpe (talk) 17:35, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. I looked at that section of the list. I don't understand why you list the British "s" spelling for some words such as criticise and verbalise without giving the American spelling. The list is a good list, but don't you think it would be more useful if the words were organized into small groups with a heading? Regarding valise, I always thought it was pronounced "valees", with an "s" sound, but I see on Wiktionary that it always has the "z" sound. I think it's because we rarely use the word at all in the U.S. CorinneSD (talk) 17:52, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
I've always heard valise with the Z sound.
Just two entries above criticise is the entry for -ise, which mentions the criticize spelling, and says that all words below can have the Z spelling except those specified. The words are strictly "retroalphabetical": it's a pity the entries can't be justified to the right, but the headword is always on the right, and you'll see that towards the end there's an entry for -ize too. Rothorpe (talk) 19:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
O.K. Thank you. I'll look at the list again in a little while. CorinneSD (talk) 19:05, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for inspiring me to make some changes, and to add valeece/valeez to the British and American English article. Rothorpe (talk) 02:56, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether you should. As I said, I just always assumed it was pronounced "valeece", but I don't recall ever hearing that word spoken. We use "briefcase", "suitcase", "luggage", and "bag". CorinneSD (talk) 00:42, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I missed this. I'll look into it. Rothorpe (talk) 03:21, 17 January 2015 (UTC)---Yes, Oxford Advanced Learner's gives the two pronunciations.
Really? That's interesting. CorinneSD (talk) 22:17, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Mr. and Mrs. Atherton

File:John F. Francis - Luncheon Still Life - Google Art Project.jpg
File:Leo Gestel Herfstdag te Nijmegen 1909.jp Autumn day in/at Nijmegen

Hafspajen I see you corrected the link for the category at FP nominations for Mr. and Mrs. Atherton, [4] but I now see the word "Wikipedia" twice, once before the brackets and once inside the brackets. Is it supposed to be there twice, or doesn't it matter? CorinneSD (talk) 21:22, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Mea culpa. Hafspajen (talk) 21:23, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Breathtaking! Nominate? CorinneSD (talk) 22:20, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
HM: well...I would rather go for a co-nom. That one I was interested in myself. Hafspajen (talk) 18:05, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Have you noticed lately on the current noms? Co-nom. Hafspajen (talk) 18:07, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
If you want to nominate the still life, please do so. I don't need to be a co-nominator. Thank you for the beautiful image of the Leo Gestel painting. I love it. CorinneSD (talk) 19:01, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Joshua Jonathan Can you tell me what "Herfstdag te Nijmegen" means? CorinneSD (talk) 19:10, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
OH, but I WANT that. "Herfstdag te Nijmegen" ...  ? Hafspajen (talk) 19:17, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
"Autumn day in/at Nijmegen". "Te" is old-fashioned Dutch;it indicates a location. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:37, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Voilá! - Hafspajen (talk) 19:59, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Corinne, start that nomination, and I will be behind you. No difference, only we BOTH get credited. Hafspajen (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh, crap. WHAT a bad presentation. Poor Leo. Leo Gestel ... Hafspajen (talk) 20:02, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
O.K. but which one do you want me to nominate -- the Luncheon still life or the Leo Gestel? Also, why do you keep putting this after your comments? It makes a big space. {{-}} CorinneSD (talk) 23:05, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Leo is to small. The other one. Those clear
so that sections dont crash into each other. Hafspajen (talk) 23:10, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
  • The problem tht people put a lot of images to the left. It is no good to put images both to left AND right in a small section. I tried to fix that before, exactly because of this reason ... but I ended up with an angry remark on my page so I am not getting involved any more. Hafspajen (talk) 22:41, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
I saw Sca's comment, and I can see how you interpreted it as angry. I see it more as expressing puzzlement and frustration; he's a man who wants to arrange things as he wants to. He had no idea that his arrangement was creating a problem. All you have to do is (a) understand, and (b) explain in a nice way what his arrangement does. You probably changed the placement of his images several times before that without explaining why. If you had explained to him the first time you did that, he would not have become irritated. Try to understand people, Hafs. Few of us know as much as you do. When you make changes like that, try to leave a brief explanation. Be like a kind and patient teacher. If you do, you will become less irritated by bumbling editors, and you will be loved. I will nominate the Luncheon still life. When you have time, can you help select and add images to the Landscape article? See suggestions at Talk:Landscape#Images. How am I doing at Featured picture nominations? Are my comments all right? All the best, CorinneSD (talk) 23:20, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Well, ask him to arrange those pictures then. I haven't changed his arrangments several times without explanation. I don't want to get into more conflicts. Yes, you are doing fine, and we can nominate that as a co-nom. As we said before. Hafspajen (talk) 23:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Here we go. Sign and add to cue, you know by now how. Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:John F. Francis - Luncheon Still Life - Google Art Project.jpg. Actually this painting was my from the beggining my New year greeting to PaleClouded White, you will notice when check where the image is used.... Hafspajen (talk) 00:25, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Do you want to do this as a co-nomination? CorinneSD (talk) 00:44, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
P.S. I'm glad you're smiling. :) CorinneSD (talk) 00:45, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
P.S.S. I thought, when you put an image of a painting on my talk page, that you were both sharing it with me and suggesting I nominate it for FP. If you don't want me to nominate a painting (for any reason), just let me know. I have no problem with you nominating an image if you'd rather do it. CorinneSD (talk) 00:48, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
The comments looked like this, only the other way round.
  • Of course, we can make that into a rule. If put an image of a painting on my talk page, I sharing it with you and/or suggesting you nominate it for FP. This one I was regarding more like a greeting or so. Placed at Yngvadottir's talk and Paleclouded too. But none of them was clever enough to realize it was a FP.... . By the way, there WAS someting I moved, now I remember. A small image that Sca placed to left at a FP nom. It did looked very weird. I have no idea how it looked on his screen but om my (several) screens looked like all the other editors comments jumped invards. Hafspajen (talk) 00:53, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Here you can look how it looked. Looked like a staircase. Hafspajen (talk) 01:00, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen I believed you. You don't have to explain to me. I have a question. You just wrote this:"Of course, we can make that into a rule. If [I] put an image of a painting on my talk page, I [am] sharing it with you and/or suggesting you nominate it for FP." What about when you put an image of a painting on my talk page? I love it when you put images on my page. (You've probably seen that I've added quite a few to my user page.) Why don't we agree that, when you put an image on my page, you indicate (can be in the edit summary) either "O.K. to nominate" or "Feel free to nominate" if you want me to nominate it, or "I'll nominate this one" if you want to nominate it. CorinneSD (talk) 01:27, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
I added "Support as co-nominator" and signed, and added a caption to the image, but I don't know what else to do. I saw that this nomination is not first on the page of nominations, but when I typed {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Luncheon Still Life}} and clicked "Preview", it was red, so I didn't save it. CorinneSD (talk) 01:50, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
How did you move all that information to the top of the nominations? CorinneSD (talk) 02:01, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
? When did I moved what infomation on top where? Hafspajen (talk) 02:09, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Right after I typed "Support as co-nominator" and saved, and typed a caption, and saved that, I went to the list of "Current nominations". I didn't see it there. I thought it would be the most recent one because I thought you just typed, signed, and saved the nomination information. Then, a little later, I saw it there, so I figured you had just put it here. Maybe it's further down in the list of current nominations than I thought. CorinneSD (talk) 02:14, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Images for Landscape article

Hafs, I'm looking for both ideas and images for the article on Landscape. I found this image from Agriculture:

Rice terraces in Banaue, Philipppines

but it doesn't look like a very sharp image. If you agree, can you help me find a similar image of these rice terraces but one that is sharper? CorinneSD (talk) 22:24, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Who is this Rwood128? Sca (talk) 21:41, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't know. Unregistered, but I don't know why. See his/her edits. CorinneSD (talk) 00:31, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen You never answered my question, above, about the rice terraces image. CorinneSD (talk) 00:32, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

  • But I noticed somebody found a rice-image. And I don't want to get involved at Landscape. Hafspajen (talk) 00:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Corinne, I was now trying to fix the images at talt and it takes time to clean up the mess. First I got edit conflicteed by 128 after that by you, I will make one more try but if it wont work I give up. It's late and I am tired. Hafspajen (talk) 02:33, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh...I'm sorry. CorinneSD (talk) 02:38, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Beautiful painting

St. Mary Magdalene, by Jan van Scorel. 1532

CorinneSD (talk) 23:32, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Jan Toorop

Jean Baptiste Jules Trayer

Hafs What happened to the first image in the last row in the gallery at the end of the article on Jan Toorop? CorinneSD (talk) 17:18, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

What a beautiful painting is the Trayer! I guess there's no article about him. I'd love to read about him. This painting would be a good illustration for an article about women's occupations in the 19th century. CorinneSD (talk) 23:00, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Was wondering about sewing or tayloring or something. Hafspajen (talk) 23:08, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I'll look at those in a minute. Read the second paragraph in the section "19th century" in the "History" section in Women in the workforce: Women in the workforce#19th century. What do you think? CorinneSD (talk) 23:41, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, the image would go with Sewing, but I notice that there are already quite a few images in that article. The other article would be Tailor. I didn't seen any appropriate place for that painting there. I think it would go well with "Women in the workforce - History - 19th century". CorinneSD (talk) 23:44, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

How about needlework?
I think Sewing or Women in the workforce is better. CorinneSD (talk) 00:00, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Added to dressmaker. Hafspajen (talk) 00:50, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

A puppy

File:Vicente-bodegon.jpg
A Puppy for you!
A Puppy for you! Hafspajen (talk) 23:55, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

3. Hafspajen (talk) 23:55, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Gnosticism

Joshua Jonathan Rothorpe Are you at all interested in Gnosticism? Would you like to weigh in on a not-very-weighty discussion about a sentence that seems out of place in a section of the article? See Talk:Gnosticism#Can someone help me with this sentence?. CorinneSD (talk) 00:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree that the second bit should go; whatever the intention, it seems to be just showing off. Rothorpe (talk) 01:20, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt reply. If you don't mind, would you also add your opinion to that section? It seems that the editor who posted the original question is waiting for consensus, and perhaps needs to hear from more editors than two. CorinneSD (talk) 01:25, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
OK, done. Rothorpe (talk) 01:41, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
And it worked! Rothorpe (talk) 18:07, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Schnapps

Rothorpe I read the article on Liqueur. From there I went to the article on Schnapps and read that. I was surprised to see the last section in that article and wonder whether it should even be there. What do you think? CorinneSD (talk) 01:27, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it does jar a bit, one thinks of Wiktionary, though it's quite interesting. Strictly speaking it should go, as it has only a linguistic connection with the drink. Rothorpe (talk) 01:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't know what to do. I've also asked Sminthopsis84 at User talk:Sminthopsis84#Schnapps. We'll see what s/he says. CorinneSD (talk) 02:09, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Landscape

Sca What's wrong, Sca? I hope you are just having dinner, relaxing with a beer, or watching a favorite program on T.V. CorinneSD (talk) 02:17, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Je suis bien. Ça va?. Sca (talk) 15:21, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm fine, thank you. Why did you ask in French? CorinneSD (talk) 22:37, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Trying to sound cultured, I suppose.
My personal history is such that I have snippets of half a dozen European languages, including French. Also, I have an old francophile friend here – whose name happens to be Charlie (!) - and when he and I meet, we exchange French civilities, such as "Ça va?" Sca (talk) 01:57, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh. My French is from high school and one or two courses in college, years ago. CorinneSD (talk) 19:22, 17 January 2015 (UTC)


Jonathan Swift

I'll check in the morning but I know that Anglo-Welsh is no longer used.Rwood128 (talk) 01:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

User:Rwood128 See Rothorpe's edits and our discussion at User talk:Rothorpe#Jonathan Swift. Thanks for your reply. CorinneSD (talk) 01:54, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Church

Hafspajen Did you say ....two thousand was a sock? See latest FP nominations. CorinneSD (talk) 02:47, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

  • I never said he was a sock. I think he is quite OK. That was someone else I meant. Hafspajen (talk) 02:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
O.K. CorinneSD (talk) 02:58, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Your talk page

Hafspajen What happened? Why did you delete so much on your talk page? I stopped editing Talk:Landscape when you told me to. I loved what was on your talk page. Won't you please put it back, or at least some of it? CorinneSD (talk) 02:58, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Corinne WHAT are you doing there being curious? Sigh up on the co-nom, as agreed. Hafspajen (talk) 19:25, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Language question

Hafspajen, re Åreskutan, how is that Swedish å pronounced? – like a German ä perhaps? Sca (talk) 22:37, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't know Swedish, but I tried to find some information to help you. I looked at the article Swedish orthography and found a table in Swedish orthography#Sound–spelling correspondences that contains that letter (a with a little circle over it), but the information next to that letter doesn't help me. I tried to find something in the IPA article but couldn't find anything. Maybe you will be able to find something there. CorinneSD (talk) 00:22, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for trying. We need to ask a Swede. .Do you know any? Sca (talk) 01:31, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm a Turnip, will that do? I believe it means that it's like the stressed 'o' in Portuguese, shorter a sort of 'aw' sound, longer like the French 'o'. Rothorpe (talk) 20:59, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Ha-ha. I only got that because I knew that a Swede is either another word for a turnip or a vegetable in the same family as the turnip, but I didn't hear that word growing up. Thank you for your ideas. I had searched on the page of the article IPA for that letter and didn't see it. CorinneSD (talk) 22:36, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Like Olalala, the O. Hafspajen (talk) 00:06, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
I think it said /o:/, didn't it? Thanks for reminding me that jokes are always a risk on the internet: one can assume too much. Swedes, post-WWII primary school food, eat it all up! good for you! Rothorpe (talk) 00:33, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh yeah, I remember now that there's an Aass beer brand from Norway. The Aass Brewery article says, "The word aass is a family name and probably an archaic spelling of ås" (with an å). So I guess Aass should be pronounced sort of like Ohhss – ??
What did you mean? CorinneSD (talk) 15:45, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Giovanni Bellini

Rothorpe I wonder if you would read through the article on Giovanni Bellini and tell me what you think of the writing style. I won't say anything until I hear what you have to say. CorinneSD (talk) 23:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Mandarin style, a connoisseur enthuses warmly. More Lord Clark of Civilisation than NPV. Rothorpe (talk) 00:53, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't know what you mean by "Mandarin style". I read the first half of the article on Kenneth Clark. I just thought that some of the sentences were constructed in a way -- a bit round about -- that made me think that a non-native speaker of English, one with a good but not perfect command of English, had written them or translated them from another language. I guess it could either be a dialect-within-a-dialect of British English or an idiolect, his own individual style. CorinneSD (talk) 01:07, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Indeed, it was surprisingly hard to find an example of that usage of 'Mandarin', but there's one contrasting it with 'New Vernacular' at Cyril Connolly#Assessment. Round about, as you say, and, yes, there could indeed have been some translating going on there. Rothorpe (talk) 01:35, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
This word is intriguing. I guess it means a certain kind of well-written English prose. I read the article on Cyril Connolly. I thought it was a strange article. It details his many travels and names his many friends and acquaintances -- almost dizzying in number -- but doesn't say much about him as a person. I don't think he was a particularly happy man. CorinneSD (talk) 01:03, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
P.S. In the middle of the article, I saw "Pearson-Smith". I think it should be "Pearsall-Smith", to match the many references to "Pearsall-Smith", but I wasn't sure. Do you want to take a look at it and perhaps correct it? CorinneSD (talk) 01:04, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
I remember Connolly first as a newspaper columnist, then as an occasional TV pundit, and finally as a writer; I read his three books in my teens, and delightfully gloomy they were. Yes, Pearsall it must be (I think it was pronounced 'Pursall'). Rothorpe (talk) 03:22, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Pierre Bonnard

Hafspajen I'm looking for a new painting to put at the top of my talk page. I want to see the paintings of Pierre Bonnard, but the article only has a few. Where can I find more, ones that I could put on my user and/or talk page? CorinneSD (talk) 00:28, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I've seen The Dining Room in the Country in Minneapolis, where I grew up. It's quite nice, I think. Sca (talk) 01:34, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
  • We have none. It is so empty at commons that it is scary. It's a tragedy. Hafspajen (talk) 00:05, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Are you suggesting that we nominate more Bonnard paintings? If so, where can I find them? Also, could you explain to me what happens when a picture is nominated and then approved for Featured picture status? Is that when it gets put into Commons, or is it just added to a special group of pictures in Commons called Featured pictures? I guess I don't really know why we nominate and approve images at FP. CorinneSD (talk) 00:13, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
There are no... not one decent image. We have to ask Crisco to upload some. Hafspajen (talk) 00:15, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Do you have any you're thinking of? For Bonnard, they will have to be paintings from before 1923, and they can only be uploaded locally to the English Wikipedia until 2018 (when French copyright on his works expires) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:12, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

John Quidor

Hafspajen Did you see the note I left at the WP FP for the John Quidor painting? I'll repeat it here: I noticed that the image of the painting of Ichabod Crane and the headless horseman appears twice in the article on John Quidor -- once at the beginning of the article and once in the gallery. Should it be there twice?

Also, I read the article and made a few edits to improve clarity and sentence flow. I also added a "clarification needed" tag and note to editors which you might be able to answer and fix. The phrase "During that period" is not clear. If you figure it out, you can let me know here what it is supposed to mean and I'll be glad to fix the sentence. CorinneSD (talk) 00:10, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

that painting is freeaking me out. I am not looking at it ... avoid that nom as much as I can. Hafspajen (talk) 00:14, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Why? If you read the story of Ichabod Crane, you will see that it is a humorous story. A skinny young schoolteacher with an active imagination is overly frightened by an older legend of the area, and his rival for the affection of a young woman takes advantage of that and follows him home, on horseback, through the woods, probably wearing his coat up high to hide his head and holding a pumpkin in his hands -- to look like the "Headless horseman" of the older legend (but we're not told, which adds to the mystery). When Ichabod rides by, Ichabod sees him and becomes terrified. The rival follows him and throws the pumpkin at Ichabod. Ichabod thinks the Headless horseman (a ghost) is throwing his head at him. He is so frightened that he rides away, never to return to that town. If you think about it this way, you won't be so upset by the painting. CorinneSD (talk) 00:59, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Because I hate ghosts. Hafspajen (talk) 01:19, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Benjamin Haydon

Hafspajen I just spent about fifty minutes copyediting the article on Benjamin Haydon. When I went to save, I got "Edit conflict". I tried to save the entire article with my edits but couldn't, so lost all my work. I'll leave it for now and re-do my work at another time. CorinneSD (talk) 01:14, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Corinne, I've found that the simplest way to sidestep that is: After you've clicked "show preview," but before you save your edit, move cursor to the previewed text, highlight all of it, and do a command/c (copy). Then save your edit, and if you get a conflict note, exit the article, go back to it, then enter your previous edit as a new edit (by clicking command/v – which gives you the text you just copied) and try saving it again. (Sometimes you have to wait a bit for the other person to stop editing.)
That's simpler than scrolling down to the automatically displayed conflicting edits, copying yours, and so forth – at least it seems handier to me. Sca (talk) 15:26, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
(PS: Re Ichabod Crane, etc., I had a parallel discussion with Hafs last Oct.) Sca (talk) 15:34, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thank you for your comment, but there are a few things I don't understand. When I get edit conflict, I highlight the previewed text, right-click and click "Copy", go to the top edit window, right-click, click "Paste", and save. What is "command"? Is that the same as "control"? Or is it a different key on the keyboard? Is "command/v" the same as "Paste"? Also, you wrote, "do a command/c (copy). Then save your edit." Why would I need to save my edit if I haven't pasted anything? Wouldn't I just hit "cancel" to exit? Also, while you're here, I don't understand why you asked me about Swedish pronunciation. I know nothing about that. Also, I have no interest in beer, and finally, do you think that last question of yours (in the section above) was appropriate for my talk page? CorinneSD (talk) 15:38, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

I didn't intend anything questionable – the name of the beer isn't pronounced like the English word you're apparently thinking of – but since you found it inappropriate I deleted it. My digression re Aass beer came about because of the parallel in the pronunciation of aa and that of the Å in Åreskutan.
Yes, command = control, and command/v (control/v) = paste.
For clarity, I should have said, "Then try to save your edit." Obviously, the problem arises only if the save doesn't work because of an edit conflict.
I was trying to be helpful. I'll remember not to mention beer on your talk page. Sca (talk) 16:02, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your explanation regarding "command/c", etc. You can mention beer on my talk page. Even though I don't drink it, I have no problem with you mentioning it. Regarding the mention of Aass beer to illustrate the sound of å, I have no problem with that, either. I just didn't understand that question. CorinneSD (talk) 16:19, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Alternate images

Hafspajen I was looking at the two images at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/William III of the Netherlands, and I thought that the difference between them was similar to the difference between the two images discussed at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anônimo - D. Pedro, Duque de Bragança.JPG and Talk:Pedro I of Brazil. You know I don't know much about image quality, and images of paintings that are in museums, but when I looked at the two images of D. Pedro, Duque de Bragança (Pedro I of Brazil) side by side, the first one, the one Adam wanted to delete, looked artificially bright, as if it had been scrubbed clean. I think a painting painted in 1835 is unlikely to be that bright. I don't think I should say anything, though, because I don't know enough about it. CorinneSD (talk) 00:45, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Very smart of you. Exactly. Hafspajen (talk) 00:47, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Images

Many thanks for the helpful advice.Rwood128 (talk) 12:39, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Priscillian

Happy New Year (however belated). 1. I removed the reference to Compostela as it was tagged as unsourced since November 2014, and I have yet to come across anything mentioning it in any of my research. 2. I entered "Idacius (Hydatius) of Merida" in one of my earlier edits, as I found him called both, but on further review I switched it to simply Hydatius, as Idacius is too similar to Ithacius of Faro and discussion of their respective roles was becoming confusing. Just trying to make it easier to understand. If someone wants to re-instate "Idacius" I have no particular views one way or the other. Hope that clarifies things. Mannanan51 (talk) 21:21, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

The version I'm looking at reads, "His notable opponents in Hispania were Hyginus, bishop of Cordoba, and Hydatius, bishop of Mérida." Mannanan51 (talk) 00:23, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm very sorry. You're right. I was looking at the revision history only, and when I saw the version on the left, with "Idatius (Hydatius)" highlighted in orange, I forgot that that was showing what was removed. I don't know why I did that. I usually know what that means. I think I've been editing for too many hours. I also only meant to just strike through my last comment on your talk page; I may have deleted it by mistake. I'm sorry to have bothered you. CorinneSD (talk) 00:36, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

For a special Wikipedian

Wikipedia Motivation Award The Wikipedia Motivation Barnstar
I very much appreciate the way you defined our co-op nom for FP. I feel fortunate to know you, and to have been part of the team. Atsme☯Consult 14:02, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Atsme Thank you so much for the barnstar! It, and your comments, mean a lot to me. I was worried that maybe I had said too much there, or that I wasn't clear. CorinneSD (talk) 18:29, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mr. and Mrs. Atherton
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Arthur Devis - Mr and Mrs Atherton - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:13, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec

Yeh, I am Charlie..Hit me.....
Yeh, I am Charlie..Hit me.....

Hafspajen I don't know if you have seen this edit, but I wonder if you could check whether it is correct or not. Since it's by an IP editor, it could just be vandalism, and even if it is not vandalism, I'm not sure the extra names are needed. [5] CorinneSD (talk) 19:20, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen and Crisco 1492 Adam Cuerden Please first read my comment just above. Then look at the last few edits to Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec. It is possible that the information added is correct, but I think it should be checked by someone knowledgeable like you. CorinneSD (talk) 22:38, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Am pinging Adam also because Hafs indicated Crisco is busier than usual, and I know Hafs is always busy. CorinneSD (talk) 23:26, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

WEll, Corinne, I tried to calm dow and stick up to my points, as you asked. More than this I can't do. Hafspajen (talk) 17:26, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I saw that. The main point that should have been made (and was made by you, but perhaps not as clearly as it could have been) was that they were objecting to the co-nomination based on two issues (co-noms by more than two editors and what constitutes a set) for which there were no established rules. That's why the discussion got so off track so quickly. I think it's important not to take this kind of thing personally, Hafs. You were charting new ground with that nomination, and just by its very nature it was bound to create confusion and opposition. You're in a position to influence the creation of the new rules/guidelines, and your opinion is valued. CorinneSD (talk) 17:53, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I have no idea. The only thing I could came up with that a set should not count as 14 0r 17 or counted for each and every picture - but as a single nomination. That probably would solve the problem. Because if evrybody gets a large amount of stars for a single large nomination - that upsets everybody- so I think counting them as 1 and not nominated as each and every separate picture them it will not devalve the process... Hafspajen (talk) 20:54, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't know - the only thing I know that the proposition as it is now is trying to make co-noms impossible - in a backward way. Hafspajen (talk) 16:42, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't have an opinion on the rules for co-nominations. I'll leave that to you and the others. Just keep standing up for your ideas (and agree to compromise when it seems like a good idea). Regarding that image -- Wow! It looks like a three-dimensional Vertumnus! Regarding my comments (and votes) on FP, if you ever think I'm not saying pertinent things or voting the right way (generally), please let me know. I don't know how to make the finer determinations of image quality (such as "noise" -- I don't even know what that is or how to see it). CorinneSD (talk) 20:16, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Well that is really very simple. If something is Chrystal clear than it is clean, if it is blurry in ANY parts of it that is what they call noise. But you have too look over every millimeter and inch of it, like these guy do. Hafspajen (talk) 02:20, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh. That was pretty simple. Thank you. CorinneSD (talk) 00:16, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Great graphs

DXR Thank you for your kind reply at Multiple co-nominators of an FPC. I looked at the two graphs you made. I am always impressed by anyone who can make a graph, and more so when the graph is made on short order. I spent a few minutes trying to understand the graphs. When I was looking at the one on the left, I saw the "slices" of the "pie", where the five largest represent, I believe, the five editors who made the most edits (in your sample). I believe they are ranked one to five in the list. I was looking at the numbers. I saw that the heading said the figures were cumulative, so I figured out that:

  • Editor 1 voted 12 times.
  • Editor 2 voted 10 times, yielding the cumulative figure of 22.
  • Editor 3 also voted 10 times, so 22 plus 10 yields the cumulative figure of 32.
  • Editor 4 voted 8 times, and 8 added to 32 yields 40.
  • Editor 5 apparently voted 9 times, because 40 plus 9 yields 49, which is the cumulative figure next to Editor 5.

I thought Editor 1 is ranked #1 because he/she voted the most times (in the sample), and that the ranking should go in order. The ranking numbers go up while the number of edits made by each editor goes down. I don't understand why you have Editor 4 -- who voted 8 times -- before Editor 5 -- who voted 9 times. Am I mis-reading or misunderstanding something? It's not a big deal. I'm just trying to understand it. CorinneSD (talk) 21:53, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Corinne, I'm happy you like the graphs. Your interpretation is pretty good. The confusion is coming from the fact that we are looking at numbers that are divided by 168 and since the numbers are rounded to whole percent, the steps appear to be wrong. In fact the numbers were 20, 17, 16, 15, 14, if I recall correctly, so everything is as it should be. --DXR (talk) 22:07, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
DXR Thank you. I'm glad everything is as it should be. I don't even understand why the numbers were divided by 168 (what numbers?) and why the numbers you just listed are so different from the first few numbers in the list -- but if you don't want to explain further, I'll understand. Thanks again. CorinneSD (talk) 22:13, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I guess I was too quick here. I counted the number of votes given by each user for a given number of current nominations (about two thirds of all nominations on the page). For example, the user who voted most often voted 20 times overall, the user ranked next 17 times and so on. To get the proportion the overall number of votes must be known and that number is 168. Therefore user #1 contributed 20 votes out of 168 total, that is 11.9%, user #2 had 17 out of 168, that is 10.1% (cumulatively we are now at 22.0%). User #3 contributed 16 votes (9.5%, cumulatively 31.5%, rounded to 32%). It goes on like that and the cumulative values are the ones you can see in the table. If all numbers are used with more figures after the dot, the apparent error disappears. --DXR (talk) 22:37, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh, that makes sense now. I didn't realize those numbers were percentages, and that they had been rounded, some a little up, some a little down. Thank you so much for explaining how you did that. I guess you used a template or special software to plug the numbers in and get the graph. (Math was one of my least favorite subjects, and I avoided it, but occasionally I find it interesting, especially how one can represent real life situations with numbers, especially graphs.) CorinneSD (talk) 00:59, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Eggplant

Sminthopsis84 What do you think of the latest edits to Eggplant? [6]

I only think a few of them are all right. The others I prefer the way it was before. CorinneSD (talk) 22:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree, most of those either change the meaning to something less apt, or show disregard for English usage. I'm half inclined to revert the whole set, but instead just worked on one paragraph. Over to you ... Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:44, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Sminthopsis84 I'm glad you went ahead and made some edits. I've been busy the last three days. I made a few more; hope you approve. I'm wondering what you think of that editor's change from passive voice "Fruit is typically cut from the vine" to active voice "Growers typically cut fruit from the vine". I wonder if this editor is one of a few I've seen who generally dislike the passive voice. I'll defer to you on this one. (I mean, who would cut eggplant from the vine except a grower? A raccoon?) CorinneSD (talk) 01:32, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm glad to hear that you weren't suffering burnout but were busy instead. Yes, I think you are right that some people remove passive voice wherever they find it. This instance I can live with. It is apparently true that the fruit stem needs cutting. I object a little to calling the plant a vine, though. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:51, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Sminth You're the botanist... CorinneSD (talk) 15:52, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Wild places

Gerda Arendt I saw your very nice note to User:Ben MacDui at User talk:Ben MacDui#Precious again. I thought you might like to have the opportunity to correct a typo in it. CorinneSD (talk) 00:33, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, can't find it, - help or fix it yourself, please, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:53, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt

  • Thank you for quality articles on the Scottish islands, such as Skye, and people such as Rachel Chiesley, Lady Grange, for you recipe against wikistress...

CorinneSD (talk) 14:28, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, must be blind ;) - congrats to the images promoted, imagine an exclamation mark for each! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:31, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
My pleasure. It's happened to me several times. Thanks for the congrats. CorinneSD (talk) 14:41, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:John F. Francis - Luncheon Still Life - Google Art Project.jpg
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:John F. Francis - Luncheon Still Life - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:22, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/A collection of paintings of that strange wild man who roamed the fields of Provence
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent van Gogh - Enclosed Field with Ploughman - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent van Gogh - Wheatfield - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent Van Gogh - Corn Harvest in Provence - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent van Gogh - Geploegde akkers ('De voren') - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent van Gogh - De oogst - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent van Gogh - Wheatfield with a reaper - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent van Gogh - Peasant woman binding sheaves (after Millet) - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent van Gogh - Green Field - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent Willem van Gogh, Dutch - Rain - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent van Gogh - Landscape from Saint-Rémy - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent Van Gogh - Wheatfield With Cornflowers - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Gogh, Vincent van - Landscape at Saint-Rémy (Enclosed Field with Peasant) - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent van Gogh - Wheatfield with crows - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent van Gogh - Wheatfield under thunderclouds - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


Congratulations...

It was an interesting experience, but the part that remains paramount in my memory is your response to it all. --Atsme☯Consult 16:21, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Atsme. Yes, it was interesting. It's interesting how people can have such different reactions to something. I think I'll avoid co-nominations for a while. CorinneSD (talk) 16:26, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
WHY? I don't think co-noms are forbidden. Hafspajen (talk) 19:05, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Actually you two should go and co-nom with each other. Corinne is good at finding good pictures. Atsme is good at articles. Find a good picture, write a little article and nominate. Hafspajen (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Okay. I'll start looking. CorinneSD (talk) 21:46, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Hafspajen I looked at the stub article for Albertus Jonas Brandt to learn a little about him. There isn't much there, so I thought I'd look at the book mentioned at the bottom of the article, a book in the public domain by Michael Bryan. I looked and looked -- even did a search in the search box -- and couldn't find the article -- or anything -- on him. How can it say in the article that material was taken from that book when there wasn't anything (that I could find) on him in it? If there is material on him, can you tell me how to find it?
Do you think there might be an article on the German Wikipedia about him that could be translated? CorinneSD (talk) 22:03, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Well, that MATERIAL they mean is probably this: Albertus Jonas Brandt, born at Amsterdam in 1788, was a scholar of J. E. Morel, after whose death, in 1808, he passed two years with G. van Os. He painted dead game, fruit, and flowers. His works are deservedly esteemed. He died at Amsterdam in 1821. Hafspajen (talk) 22:09, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Where did it came, I don't know... Hafspajen (talk) 22:10, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
I found the material in that book by searching for Brandt on Google, then I found that same book. When I clicked on it, the article was highlighted. It's at the bottom of page 177. It's very small, just what you copied above. Thanks for the links. I looked at all of them. I also found some beautiful paintings by Brandt on Google. I haven't learned much about Brandt other than what's in the stub, so I can't say much in the nomination. CorinneSD (talk) 22:36, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/en/collection/SK-A-1012 http://stilllifequickheart.tumblr.com/post/7986598128/albertus-jonas-brandt-and-eelke-jelles-eelkema http://www.dekling.nl/winkel/overige-schilders/aquarel-van-albertus-jonas-brandt-1788-1821/

Hafspajen I nominated the Albertus Jonas Brandt "Flowers in a Terracotta Vase". After I saved it, I saw that "Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings" is linked in other nominations. I didn't link it. I didn't know it should be linked. Now I don't know (a) whether it is important to add the link, and (b) how to link it now that it's already in the nominations. CorinneSD (talk) 22:50, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

?? Have to check what you mean. Hafspajen (talk) 22:52, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
But it is not nominated anywhere else. This painting has never been nominated before... Or you mean -what? Hafspajen (talk) 22:57, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
You know how, when you first fill in the template, there is a place for "Category". I always put "Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings", and that's what other painting nominations have. But I saw that in other recent painting nominations, that is linked (to something). In mine, it is not. I didn't know it had to be linked. CorinneSD (talk) 23:08, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Fixed. Hafspajen (talk) 23:26, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. CorinneSD (talk) 23:36, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
.And it's a mess as usual. Hafspajen (talk) 03:43, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I don't know if this is to any consolation.. but at least the file is good... Hafspajen (talk) 21:18, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Do you mean I could nominate this? CorinneSD (talk) 23:11, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
In a week. Was uploaded yesterday. But we will see what others say about the 3 files, who knows ... maybe it works. Hafspajen (talk) 23:34, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Question - what if I have my own photographs, and some of them are already in articles. Can you also nominate those pictures, or does it have to be photos of art? Atsme☯Consult 05:25, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

I'll let Hafspajen answer your question, but did you see the banner across the top of the main page? You can vote for your favorite images of 2014. There are quite a few categories, and you'll see photos of things other than paintings. In Round 1 you can vote for as many images as you like. CorinneSD (talk) 17:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Of course you can, if they are FP standard. 1500px X 1500px, used, clear, crisp and sharp... Hafspajen (talk) 17:16, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
(That is, at least 1500px x 1500px.) CorinneSD (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Maybe you shoud reinstall your comment .... [7] Hafspajen (talk) 22:51, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Corrine, I looked everywhere on the front page, and didn't where I could vote. Is it still there? Is there a link I can go to? Atsme☯Consult 05:08, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen, CorinneSD - what do you think about this one as a nom - [[8]]. It's in use, and was used by one of the entrees in the WikiCup. it's kinda fishy, or maybe closer to "slippery as an eel". Atsme☯Consult 02:17, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Could work, if you remove that feather thing in the right upper corner, - because that will certainly get comments. Hafspajen (talk) 02:23, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
I think. I am not sure about the sharpness. But Crisco 1492 is much-much better on photos than I am. Hafspajen (talk) 02:25, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
  • There is noise or something from a high ISO, but that's more or less unavoidable with an underwater shot. At 50% (over 1500px) it's pin sharp). I'd expect it to have a good chance. (The eel, right?) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:32, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Thx Crisco 1492 - yes, the chain moray eel with an open feather duster above its head appearing like the sun. . I guess it's time for me to "get my feet wet", and see if I can nominate it. Atsme☯Consult 03:06, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Robert Antoine Pinchon

Yngvadottir I don't know whether you know French or not, but since you know quite a few languages, I thought I'd ask. What do you think of the change from "parmi" to "chez" in Robert Antoine Pinchon [9]. I thought "chez" was used when referring to a house or home. I suppose it could be extended to refer to a group of people, but this is a group of people in a metaphor, where the people are a group of painters who are being called "wild beasts" in relation to a classical sculpture in their midst. The painters themselves are not actually in the room; it's their works that are being hung on the walls in an exhibition. To me, "chez" means "at home" or "at home with" and "parmi" means "among", "amongst", or "amidst". I'm not an expert, so I thought I'd ask you what you thought. CorinneSD (talk) 19:31, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I do :-) The editor gave the URL for a scan of the original page, but I couldn't figure out how to search for the phrase or to zoom. If you can, there's the best answer. Since I couldn't, I went looking - Larousse has "parmi", but a large number of sources, including books like this one, have "chez". I believe it's best understood as "in the den of the wild beasts". Yngvadottir (talk) 20:44, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Yngvadottir I looked at the source at the URL. It took me a while, but I finally found how to search the document. It's all the way at the left. There is a phrase written vertically: Module de reserche. If you click on the tiny black arrow/triangle, a window opens up. You'll see where to search in the document. I searched for "Donatello chez les fauves". This is what I found:
"La CIDdeur de ces bustes surprend, au milieu de l'orgie des tons purs : Donatello chez les fauvesbrèche- d'iridis, Uni ton fauve tigré, qui est un remarquable modèle." I can't seem to get a translation using Google translate in edit mode. Maybe I'll be able to do it after I've saved this.
I wanted to ask you about something else in the article on Pinchon. In the section 1924-1938, at the beginning of the fourth-to-last paragraph, after "In 1931" there is the name of a union or organization in French: l'union etc. I just wonder whether the "l" of "l'union" should be capitalized. It is the name of an organization. I don't know whether there is a rule in French saying that the definite article (le/la/l') should not be capitalized if it is in the middle of a sentence. If there is no such rule, then I think it should be capitalized, don't you? CorinneSD (talk) 17:40, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
That confirms it then - "chez" is correct (as I say I'd go with the "in the den" interpretation) and Larousse has it wrong. The passage reads: La candeur de ce buste surprend, au milieu de l'orgie de tons purs : Donatello chez les fauves. - "The candor [i.e., realism] of this bust is a surprise, Donatello in the den of wild beasts"; the remainder presumably refers to the painting of a tiger cub playing with its mother.
Yes, French has such a rule (and also does not capitalize other non-proper nouns in a title after the initial capital). I've solved the clash of French and English usage in the article by replacing "l'" with "the" outside the italics. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:56, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh. O.K. That's one rule I hadn't remembered from my French studies many years ago. Thanks for your explanations and help. CorinneSD (talk) 18:02, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Edits

Well, I didn't think "and, as such" was necessary, so I agreed with its removal, but I thought the sentence could still be improved, so I revised that sentence. You'll see that I made a number of edits in that section. CorinneSD (talk) 03:13, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Atsme, I am affraid that people are very much against digital manipulation you have to think about that the colored version might have been manipulated , even if I have to say I like it myself much better. Bot I mean not if it has been manipulated, because that generally counts as a descalification... That was a bit of a blow, I have to admit. Also, witch one of the fish? Hafspajen (talk) 05:10, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, Hafs, but I'm confused about your question - which one of the fish? Atsme☯Consult 05:21, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Ooops - sorry Hafs, didn't see the alt when I posted. It's fixed now. Thanks for letting me know. --Atsme☯Consult 06:30, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
I think it was pretty clear in my comment and vote that I supported the original photo of the koi. To me, the "alt" is not an alternate version of the same image but a different photo altogether. If I really liked it, I would support it, but I liked the original better. It looks like the original is gaining support. CorinneSD (talk) 17:05, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Of course it was, Corinne. This makes me wonder a bit, Atsme, are you quite sure that you want that a nomination with four nominators would require 8 supports votes? Because it will be your support that will make this motion go through. I am not asking you to change your mind if you think it was a good idea, I am only asking if you really meant that or it was unreflected. Considering that you were one of the four nominators ... for example ours would not have been promoted ( we had only six votes) if this rule that you yes for, was valid. This will make four co-noms impossible in the future. Not sure that I want to do that any more but maybe others will... Hafspajen (talk) 02:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
'*I mean it was odd that you should support it, but of course you maybe think it is a good idea. If you really think so. --Hafspajen (talk) 02:38, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
No, Hafs - I didn't realize I was supporting such a concept, so I'd better read it again. It's all still a bit confusing. I'm still trying to remember all the acronyms, like "EV". Atsme☯Consult 02:44, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Same here. I thought "EV" was "educational value", but I guess it means "encyclopedic value" (but I don't think those two phrases are that far apart). I have no idea regarding the voting on that issue, so I won't say anything about that. CorinneSD (talk) 02:48, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Landscape

What do you think of this edit in Landscape? [10]

Hafspajen from an art expert's point of view, and Rothorpe from a writer's point of view. If the sentence without the addition of "an example" is not wrong, I think it would be less wordy (especially for the lede) and more concise without it. CorinneSD (talk) 03:20, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Cucurbita FAC status

Hi. I know you're busy, but I was wondering if you could take a look at the Cucurbita article now and let us know at the FAC page what you think now. We've had two Supports since your last visit, but we still need image, source, and copyvio checks. We truly appreciate all the help you've given so far and enjoy working with you. HalfGig talk 22:24, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

HalfGig Thanks for asking me and for your kind comments. I'm not an expert on images. I'll comment on those (later) only if there is something particular I notice. I'm not very good at source or copyvio issues. You'll have to rely on someone else for those. I've gone ahead and posted some comments at FAC: [11] - CorinneSD (talk) 00:13, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much, but I don't see any new comments. HalfGig talk 00:22, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I was still working on them. You should see them now. It takes me a while to get the italics (and occasional boldface just so you can see suggested additions) right. CorinneSD (talk) 00:29, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, fixed them all but item 2. I have the same question about item 2, the first word point, and have asked Chiswick Chap about it. HalfGig talk 00:49, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
User:HalfGig I've made two additions without first asking you at FAC. If you don't agree with them, please feel free to revert or change them. Also, if you prefer I ask you first at FAC, please tell me and I won't do that again. I feel the word "on" (in "on into South America") makes the movement south clearer. I'm less sure about the addition of "and": [12]. I wasn't crazy about three clauses: X; Y; Z with no indication of the relationship between them. I thought the third piece of information (the ones that root from the node "to a lesser extent") kind of went with the second piece of information -- that is, they both root from the node. If I didn't understand this correctly, let me know. (This sentence wasn't, and still isn't, real clear to me. Perhaps more could be done to make this combined sentence crystal clear.) CorinneSD (talk) 01:49, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh, feel free to edit it directly. You make superb copyedits. As for XYZ, perhaps ask Sminth. I'm not sure what you mean there and it sounds like something she'd be better at than myself. HalfGig talk 01:54, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Sminthopsis84 Can you read my last comment just above and review the two edits, particularly the second one? I supplied a link to the second of the two. CorinneSD (talk) 02:04, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I agree that it reads better the way you have it now, and I can't think of any way to further improve the prose. Nicely done. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 20:48, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

HalfGig I saw that in Michael Nee's list of species and species groups, the spacing around en-dashes was inconsistent, some with spaces, some with one, some with one before and one after, so I decided to add the spaces and make them all consistent. However, upon looking at it now, I wonder if there are too many dashes. Do you like the way it looks now? What do you think of changing the en-dashes that follow "origin" to colons: origin:? CorinneSD (talk) 03:06, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Changed to colons. HalfGig talk 03:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

At the beginning of Cucurbita#Germination and seedling growth is the following sentence:

  • Seed with maximum germination potential in C. moschata develops by 45 days after anthesis, and seed weight reaches its maximum 70 days after anthesis.

I find the first part of this sentence a little unclear. I'm wondering if it would make sense if we move "in C. moschata" to the beginning of the sentence:

  • In C. moschata, seed with maximum germination potential develops by 45 days after anthesis, and seed weight reaches its maximum 70 days after anthesis.

Probably, "seed" is normal botanists' lingo, but I'm wondering if would be more understandable for the average reader if it were "seeds...develop" instead of "seed...develops". CorinneSD (talk) 03:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

The first sentence of the second paragraph in this section is:

  • When there is more pollen applied to the stigma, as well as the fruit being larger and containing more seeds, the germination of the seeds is also faster and more likely, and the seedlings are larger.

There are a couple of things about this sentence that are not clear to me.

(a) In this clause, "When there is more pollen applied to the stigma", it is not clear who, or what, would apply the pollen to the stigma. Presumably this is referring to natural pollination by an insect, but that's not entirely clear. Just the use of the verb "applied" suggests that it could be a human. Also, this clause gives no indication of when this happens, or why there would be more pollen at some times than at others. The word "when" really begs the question, "When?"


(b) Regarding, "as well as the fruit being larger and containing more seeds", it is also not clear when or why this would happen. (It's also not the best grammatical construction, but we can work on that.) CorinneSD (talk) 04:00, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I've made some changes to try to clarify those points. It is always difficult to talk about experimental results that seem to illustrate general principles but have really only shown what happens in one cultivar of one species. I hope this edit makes it clearer. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 20:57, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
First, I apologize for having divided the discussion into two parts -- here and at FAC. Second, since this will be about that last edit and your last comment just above, I'll continue here. Third, bear with me; have patience. Sminth, your last comment just above did clarify things for me somewhat, but I still find the sentence unclear and/or not worded as well as it could be. I looked at the first reference to the xenia effect. It's at the beginning of the second paragraph in Cucurbita#Reproductive biology:
  • When there is more pollen applied to the stigma, more seeds are produced in the fruits and the fruits are larger with greater likelihood of maturation, an effect called xenia.
To me, this sentence is pretty clear: first, more pollen on the stigma causes more seeds to be produced in the fruits and the fruits to be larger. These last two effects mean a greater likelihood that the plant will mature and produce fruit. This last effect is called xenia. Do I have it right? It's really A causes B1 and B2. B1 and B2 cause C (greater likelihood of maturation). The sentence we've been working on appears at the beginning of the second paragraph in the section Cucurbita#Germination and seedling growth:
  • Experiments have shown that when more pollen is applied to the stigma, as well as the fruit containing more seeds and being larger (the xenia effect mentioned above), the germination of the seeds is also faster and more likely, and the seedlings are larger.
I understand that this statement expresses results of research on one species that may or may not apply to other species. The first part of the sentence is similar to the other sentence and seems fine. The second part, which starts "as well as", does not make clear the connection between the fruit having more seeds and being larger to more pollen being applied to the stigma. The last part of the sentence is similar to what's in the first sentence but actually provides a bit more detail about the ultimate effect. There is another difference between this sentence and the first sentence: in the first sentence, the xenia effect is mentioned at the very end of the sentence, suggesting that the xenia effect is greater likelihood of maturation when there are more seeds and the fruit is larger (B1 and B2 causes C). In this sentence, the xenia effect is mentioned in the middle of the sentence, suggesting that the xenia effect is more seeds and larger fruit resulting from more pollen on the stigma (A causes B1 and B2). I wonder whether this cause and effect chain needs to be explained in both Reproductive biology and Germination and seedling growth. If it does, then I think the second sentence needs a little more work to be really clear. I also think it's got to be made really clear what exactly the xenia effect is. CorinneSD (talk) 21:56, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Bass (fish)

Rothorpe, Mutt Lunker I saw this edit to Bass (fish) - [13], and I wanted to ask your opinion of it. I know that normally "fish" is both the singular and plural form of the noun (similar to "fruit"), but I believe that occasionally "fishes" (like "fruits") is used to mean "types of fish, collectively" (as "fruits" is used to mean "various types of fruit"). (I'm actually more sure about "fruit/fruits" than I am of "fish/fishes", so that's why I'm asking you.) What do you think? Is "fishes" appropriate here -- or is it ever correct? I know "fish" is not wrong here, but is "fishes" more appropriate? CorinneSD (talk) 20:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, 'fishes' would be fine there. Rothorpe (talk) 20:45, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Language issue

"Le tonneau de Diogène"

Humboldtian model of higher education. If you can make this to flow smoothly and make sense that would something. It is a DYK, and the main editor Serten is German. I am to no good at language problems, tried to rewrite it into something that made sense to me but now it is rewritten by him again, so - I feel I can't really do much, because I did what I thought was right. DYK - Template:Did you know nominations/Humboldtian education ideal - and article Humboldtian model of higher education. I really don't KNOW what to do, after this diff I give up- it is a bit like Blade. If we don't get some language help it will not work. And I have to say, I don't always know what it is about either. My last version, cited at the DYK template is based on the English references. I know nothing about the Germans. That's the situation. Hafspajen (talk) 01:01, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Sca als siegreicher Feldherr
Hafspajen I went over the article. It's not bad. I just made a few changes. I have just a few questions, but I don't know where to leave them. CorinneSD (talk) 01:48, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
O.K. I'll do that in a minute. I don't understand the image you just placed here. Is it because "Diogene" is Diogenes, a Greek philosopher? CorinneSD (talk) 01:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Well, it's him alright. An original individual. Hafspajen (talk) 02:09, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Hafspajen I made some edits in the article, but regarding the questions I had, we're going round and round in circles. Serten II's wording is invariably not colloquial English, but I'm having difficulty understanding what s/he means. We really need someone fluent in both German and English. Would you be offended if I asked Sca for his help? CorinneSD (talk) 02:19, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Well, there is somebody fluent in both German and English involved already, Gerda Arendt Look at the article history... Hafspajen (talk) 02:22, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh, yes. In spite of her name, I wasn't sure what languages she knew. Maybe she's already been following my exchanges with Serten II. Well, I'll ask her to help. Thanks! CorinneSD (talk) 02:37, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt Gerda...help! Please read what's just above and then read my exchanges with Serten II at User talk:Serten II#Humboldtian model of higher education. CorinneSD (talk) 02:42, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
  • She might be sleeping. Serten is a philosopher. Hafspajen (talk) 03:05, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
What's the connection with the photo of William I? Was he German? CorinneSD (talk) 03:10, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
THE Connection is the PAINTER: look at him. Hafspajen (talk) 12:05, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen I want to find another picture for the top of my talk page. Once, you gave me a link to a lot of images -- many on a page -- but I can't find it now. It's not the link the Google Art project that I have at the top of this page. Can you help me? I've looked at the Google Art project (link at top) but haven't found what I'm looking for. CorinneSD (talk) 03:31, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Try this too . National Gallery of Victoria https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Google_Art_Project_works_in_National_Gallery_of_Victoria
' And the Smithsonian. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Google_Art_Project_works_in_Smithsonian_American_Art_Mus

I can help after Monday, - my language is in cats on my user page ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:07, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm shocked to read that someone might be offended by someone else asking me for help. Ich dachte, solche Gefühle unter uns endlich vorbei worden waren.
Ich bin enttäuscht. Sca (talk) 13:08, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Sigh... Now now. I just said that Gerda knows about everything already... By the way, why is your page liked as Featured picture candidate? Check it out.

Category:Wikipedians whose talkpages are decorated by Hafspajen 

Hafspajen (talk) 15:01, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Tout est pardonné. Sca (talk) 21:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Eh, you MAY comment of course... Hafspajen (talk) 01:15, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Hafspajen, thank you for the links and for the beautiful painting at the top of the page. Is that an example of painting in the Romantic period (Romanticism)? I can just imagine the warm summer day, the gurgle of the water, the cool shade of the trees, the quiet, the sound of insects buzzing, the laughter... CorinneSD (talk) 16:21, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
P.S. Why is that painting at the top so dark? Is it just age? Or is that the way the painting looked when it was painted? CorinneSD (talk) 16:25, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Which one is dark? Hafspajen (talk) 19:23, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
And Why on eart is Sca walking around with so much decorations? Hafspajen (talk) 19:25, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Explain yourself, troll-lover! ☺ Sca (talk) 21:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
I was referring to the George Morland painting at the top of my talk page. CorinneSD (talk) 21:58, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
OH, I thought you meant the uniform guy. Cos he looks like Sca too...actually rather a lot.... Hafspajen (talk) 01:11, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
That's what I said yesterday, here, but I deleted it because I didn't want to offend anyone. CorinneSD (talk) 01:26, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Did I never tell you that Wilhelm I is my great-great-great-grandfather? Sca (talk) 01:38, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
No, you didn't. Do you really know who your great...(etc.) grandfather is? CorinneSD (talk) 01:43, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
My sister did some research indicating we had a great-great- (and maybe another great-) grandfather who, though he was an ethnic German, hailed from near Warsaw. We know his name. (At one time several centuries back there were quite a few Germans in or around Warsaw and some other Polish cities.) This guy's grandson, one of our great-grandfathers, ended up in the Russian Empire (in what's now Moldova), married a Danube Swabian woman, and they emigrated from there to the U.S. around 1875. Our grandma, though born in the U.S., spoke a bit of Swabian German handed down from her forbears – until our grandpa forbid speaking German in their home, saying, "We are Americans!" (But I do go on.) Sca (talk) 18:08, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
PS: Nice Cassatt up there. Sca (talk) 18:11, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Sca That's very interesting. I had heard the term "Swabian" before but knew nothing about it. Thanks for the link to the Danube Swabian article. That looks like an interesting article which I will read when I have time (and there are a lot of links in that article, too). I'm glad you like the Cassatt painting. I really like her paintings. This one in particular has that feel of a Japanese woodblock print (I believe she may have been influenced by Japanese prints, no?). The colors are a little cooler than her other paintings, but intriguing. I wish I could find more modern paintings; there are only a few that I like in those links Hafs gave me. CorinneSD (talk) 19:15, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Higher education: I tried, and left further thoughts on the article talk, - the place to concentrate efforts to improve the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:02, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda. I'll look at that now. CorinneSD (talk) 19:15, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

?

Vsmith Do you think anything additional needs to be done? [14], [15], or is it best to ignore it? CorinneSD (talk) 19:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

That is a school ip - now tagged as such. If the "playing" continues we can give them an extended vacation. Vsmith (talk) 23:31, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Vsmith I've noticed a number of times that test or vandalism edits are made right after I edit an article. Here's another one: [16]. CorinneSD (talk) 17:23, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps the ip was scanning recent changes ... or you have a troll following. :)
That last one was also a school ip, left an eduip note on their talk. Vsmith (talk) 18:10, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Never heard of either sch CorinneSD (talk) 18:16, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Virginia Woolf

I'd like some help in moving some information that was just added to the article on Virginia Woolf into a note. See my discussion with Rwood128 at User talk:Rwood128#Virginia Woolf. I'd like to do this myself, but I've never added a note to an article. Could someone tell me how to do this? CorinneSD (talk) 23:10, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

CorinneSD see John Cowper Powys for an example. Rwood128 (talk) 00:48, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, R. I posted my request for assistance here because I didn't want to bother you. I looked at the Powys article and when I click on "Edit", either at the "Notes" section at the end of the article or at the very top of the article, all I see is a template that says "Reflist...group=something". I really don't know how to do this. CorinneSD (talk) 00:54, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
CorinneSD I've copied the note and the necessary reflist here. The VW article has 'Notes' which you need to change to 'References'. Hope that this is clear. Just click edit and cut and paste. If you like, just edit VW and I'll do the note tomorrow (that is if you still think the use of a note is appropriate here).

[note 1]

Rwood128 Thank you I read WP:Footnotes. I see what you have provided here. I just don't understand why I have to change "Notes" to "References". Is that a mistake? Should it already have been "References"? Also, if I do that, am I supposed to create a separate section for "Notes" for this one footnote? I'm asking all these questions before I do anything so I don't mess anything up. CorinneSD (talk) 00:24, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it is somewhat confusing. The simplest way to explain it is to say that for VW, (1) citations go under the heading 'References' and (2) the note go under 'Notes' (otherwise you'll end up with two headings that are, confusingly, called called 'Notes'). This an alternative way to the frequently used system of putting both citations and notes under one heading. Citations on Wikipedia are sometimes placed under the heading 'Notes' and sometimes 'References'. You may think it not worth doing for one item, but I thought that you might be interested, as it can, in some circumstances, be a useful tool. See Novel for an example of an extensive use of notes. Rwood128 (talk) 01:03, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Wow! That's quite a list of note! Thank you so much for explaining this to me. Now I see why "Notes" has to be changed to "References". Then I guess I need to make a new heading for "Notes",, and this one note will be there. CorinneSD (talk) 01:09, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes -- sorry I missed that step out.

Re Novel those notes were my attempt to try and sort things out -- the article is over-full with facts and I periodically try and improve it. Rwood128 (talk) 01:18, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Rwood128 How does it look? Virginia Woolf CorinneSD (talk) 00:55, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Good. Rwood128 (talk) 11:08, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help. CorinneSD (talk) 23:47, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Notes

  1. ^ For more information on DeSalvo's views on the sexual abuse suffered by Woolf see

Rwood128 (talk) 02:05, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

,,,

  • Corinne, Atsme - the voting period is over but you can still save the nom if you make clear what you prefer, original or ALT. There is enough support for the scan from Riksm. Or if you are unsure can simply add support any. But if you of course still prefer original - then - stick with it. --Hafspajen (talk) 01:52, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
' But I think A. is still waiting to give you a chance. It's not closed yet. Hafspajen (talk) 01:58, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Hafspajen I don't have a problem with adding "Support ALT 2" if that's what's needed, but it looks horrible to me (so dark and dull). Is it still worth making it into a Featured picture? I'll do whatever you advise. CorinneSD (talk) 02:30, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
  • In that case I advise you to think it is horrible and dull, and do nothing. It is difficult to know without actually visiting and checking. There is thought some editor we could ask, from Amsterdam, now that I came to think of a Dutch editor, who I run into. Hafspajen (talk) 02:34, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
  • It's Taksen . Hafspajen (talk) 02:38, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Do you mean you would ask Taksen what the painting actually looks like in the museum? I'm just curious what you think of ALT 2. CorinneSD (talk) 02:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Well, - he is a guide in Museum Geelvinck-Hinlopen, I imagine he could simply take his bike or walk over to Riksmuseum and look... I am curious too. Hafspajen (talk) 02:42, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
That would be very nice, but is there time? The voting period seems to be over. Would they wait until tomorrow?
  • I'ts late. But Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Flowers in a Terracotta Vase is rather a puzzling nom. You CAN ask Armbrust to put it on hold, though. I don't think that it is so colorful like the first one, but maybe not so faded as the last, witch is, even if it is much more detailed is too colorless. Or so it seems. Maybe it is correct. I don't know. ‎The small Riksscan is 1,950 × 2,500 pixels, the last is indeed huge - 5,309 × 6,807 pixels - and the details are very good. The colors look faded though. Hafspajen (talk) 02:47, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
  • 2 scans
  • ALT 1 File:Bloemen in een terracotta vaas. Rijksmuseum SK-A-1013.jpeg
    ALT 1 File:Bloemen in een terracotta vaas. Rijksmuseum SK-A-1013.jpeg
  • ALT 2Rijksmuseum scan -
    ALT 2Rijksmuseum scan -
  • On the other hand it could be fading too... Hafspajen (talk) 03:16, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Well, too late, it's closed. Hafspajen (talk) 03:26, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Karl Nordström

Hafspajen Hafs, I noticed that in Karl Nordström, a lot of the image captions do not include the date of the painting. Is there a particular reason for that? Would you mind if I added the year to the captions? CorinneSD (talk) 16:38, 4 February 2015 (UTC) Because if I did someone will come around and start sorting them after date. That crokus bowl is from 1910, that will make it jump to the end of the gallery - making it looking awkward. Why don't you make a list of them above? Hafspajen (talk) 21:03, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Now I serarated private spere from landscapes - but I think it looked better before. I think we had this discussion before, and I still think that making an estetic presentation of the gallery is more inportant then putting things in cronological order unless the artist indeed had very diifferent styles like Picasso. (Pink period, blue period, cubism, and so on) - othervise I think arranging things after cronology just destroys the layout. I mean most of the time there is no big beneftits in arranging things in a cronological order - it is often just a disadvantage in trying to present an artist's work. Hafspajen (talk) 21:21, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Oh. O.K. Thanks for the explanation. I hadn't forgotten that you prefer to arrange images on aesthetic principles rather than in chronological order. It just hadn't occurred to me that adding the dates might prompt someone to re-arrange them in chronological order. I haven't looked at your new arrangement yet. I hope you didn't think I was suggesting that you re-arrange the images, because I wasn't. I trust your judgment completely. CorinneSD (talk) 21:45, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I just looked at it. Why did you change the arrangement? I liked it better before. I recall it as a bit more random-looking (even though I know you had arranged the images carefully). This arrangement looks too intellectual/rational. CorinneSD (talk) 21:52, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I liked better before to. But if you start arranging the gallery in cronological odder the themse will blend after crononlogy. No painter ever painted paintings for a wiki-gallery. Hey 1895 Ipainted this, 197 I will paint a different motive but i have to be careful that it should match the one from 1895....' No artis does such things. Hafspajen (talk) 21:58, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I didn't know whether it was in chronological order before or not because I hadn't looked at the dates in each file, and I'm neither encouraging nor asking you to put them in chronological order. - CorinneSD (talk) 22:08, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
OK, I don't know what to do.i have had many issues about this subject. Too many. There are som many uninspired image editors - no names - who I have to fight with on layout issues in art articles that I generally those few articles I can have free from them, I rather don't put out any dates. My experience is =you put out dates, somebody comes soner or later and destroys the layout. We don't tend to care much about how galleries look like, we just care to put out dates and put them in cronological order. I had som many fights on this topic that I am allergic to this topic by now. Hafspajen (talk) 23:44, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Albertus Jonas Brandt

this face then?

Hafspajen Hafs, I just made a few copy-edits to the article on Albertus Jonas Brandt. I noticed something odd at the beginning of the article. The first sentence says, "Brandt was born on the 22nd as the son of a book printer and seller," but his date of birth is 25 November. How could he be born on the 22nd? CorinneSD (talk) 00:45, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

A ..MIRACLE!! - (probably something is wrong) Hafspajen (talk) 00:47, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Ha, no it's Taksen. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Albertus_Jonas_Brandt&diff=next&oldid=644170829 Hafspajen (talk) 00:54, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Crisco looks good to me...

(edit conflict) (I wondered how you could ping Crisco with just "1492".)

Oh, wow! He's got an interesting face. It would be nice to find a portrait (painting) of him, too. CorinneSD (talk) 00:56, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Taksen forgot the info-box. Hafspajen (talk) 00:58, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm more handsome than the guy with the difficult user name. - Brandt
  • Crisco has a difficult username.- Hafspajen (talk) 00:58, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Looks like my breakfast.. Hafspajen (talk) 01:00, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
What is that on the plate in the painting? Doesn't look very appetizing/tasty. Also, the title says "young man"; he doesn't look very young, and he looks like he needs to go to the dentist. CorinneSD (talk) 01:04, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Fish. He is younger than old, drinks beer and eats fish. I love fish for breakfast. Not beer though. One can't drive when drinks beer for breakfast. Hafspajen (talk) 01:20, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I noticed the beer. They didn't have cars in those days, so he didn't have to worry. CorinneSD (talk) 01:22, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Tilia

I saw your last edit to Tilia in which you removed the material under "Cultural significance". I wondered if you were in a bad mood. I'm not saying it should go back in, but do articles on plants and trees generally have no section about the plant "In popular culture" or in "Literary references" or something like that? Don't you think it would be interesting for readers to read about references to tilia/linden/lime trees in literature? Unter den linden, etc. Just wondering. CorinneSD (talk) 01:01, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh...I didn't realize you were putting all that stuff into a new article. Wonderful! You made a nice article - Lime tree in culture - in just a few minutes. So forget what I said just above this. Thanks for providing the links to the other tree articles (at Talk:Tilia). Those are really nice articles, and I intend to read them. CorinneSD (talk) 01:14, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
GURK. I new I am going to have theses questions. Hafspajen (talk) 01:16, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
And me who even spare the non-eminent Eminiscest poet or whathimscalled. Hafspajen (talk) 01:17, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Hafs What is "GURK"? I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you mean by your last sentence, "And me who...". Could you please explain? CorinneSD (talk) 01:31, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Gurk is GRR+URK. Hafspajen (talk) 01:33, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Eminiscest is the poet who I should have kicked out from the new article. Felt a lot for doing so. Hafspajen (talk) 01:34, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
You are a bad influence. I've been looking at other tree articles! Do you agree with my comment here? [17] or have I just become obsessed? The Lime tree in culture article also frustratingly superficial, though obviously that's not Hafspajen's fault. The whole topic of tree symbolism, mythology and folklore is most interesting -- but difficult. Perhaps what is really needed is one article, covering these topics, for trees as a whole? The popular culture aspect doesn't seem too fruitful, from the examples that I've seen so far (for various trees). Though the problem is not with popular culture but the use of superficial lists. Rwood128 (talk) 14:29, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
I think people who look up an article on a particular tree might like to read about cultural, literary, mythological, and historical information related to that tree. Regarding "in popular culture", I've noticed in many articles that it usually one of the last sections in the article (so not so important), and that editors try to keep it trimmed only to the most notable or interesting items. If a separate article is created, I think it should only be on symbolism of trees in literature and mythology (without removing all information on those topics from individual tree articles, but possibly expanding that information). Have you looked at the article on Oak? Look at Oak#Cultural significance. It's pretty well organized, and I like that heading, "Cultural significance". I don't recommend removing all that information from that and other tree articles to create a new article. I don't know why Hafspajen moved all of that information from the Tilia article. S/He probably got exasperated by a long list of seemingly unrelated and trivial bits of information. So, in summary, I suggest:
1) Include a section on "Cultural significance" in each tree article, using sub-headings as in Oak#Cultural significance if there is enough material, and keeping "In popular culture" items to a minimum ("In popular culture" could be one sub-heading under "Cultural significance");
2) from the separate article Hafs created, Lime tree in culture, put back into the Tilia article what would be appropriate to include in a section headed "Cultural significance";
3) create a new article called "Symbolism of trees", including and expanding upon material in individual tree articles, and putting the focus on the symbolism of trees in literature, mythology and perhaps religion, but leaving out popular culture and other trivia;
4) if you really think there is enough material for a separate article on "Trees in popular culture", perhaps that could be a separate article, but where do you draw the line between, say, mythology and present-day popular culture? You'd have to define and limit "popular culture" to 20th-21st century music, theater, and art (for example). CorinneSD (talk) 20:52, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Here is something interesting about Chistmas tree, not in article.http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/thepastinthepresent/storybehind/whychristmastrees.html Hafspajen (talk) 21:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
You're right. Those articles have a lot of good information. I wonder, though, if all the items in Tree worship#In literature and Tree worship#In film and TV are about tree worship (the worship of trees) -- I don't think so. I wonder if some or most of the items would be better included in either the "Cultural significance" section of individual tree articles or in a separate article on "Tree in popular culture" or "Tree in literature and mythology" (and leave religion to another article/other articles such as Tree worship and Tree of life). CorinneSD (talk) 21:17, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Rwood128 I see you keep editing Lime tree in culture, but you haven't responded to my suggestions, above. What do you think? CorinneSD (talk) 23:19, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
  • I think puting back the material would lead to the same problem. Ask what Sminthopsis84 thinks about adding this kind of things to botanic articles. Symbolism of trees is a good idea. And actually Oak is on my list for next removing that stuff from it. Together with Elm, Chesnut and Populus. Hafspajen (talk) 23:49, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Your comments above must have come after I revised the lede. Yes, I have seen the Oak article and put the list banner up on it.

What you say is perfectly reasonable. I'm not so sure now about the idea of a new tree article, especially as there is one on Tree worship. Cultural significance is a reasonable heading. I don't see much point now of moving material back into Tilia – it seems to me like needless work. Perhaps Hafspajen was too quick to act, I'm not sure?

The real problem, as I see it, is the superficiality of the discussion of mythology, folklore and popular culture, as well as the lack of citations, in the 'Lime tree in culture' article (and those under some other trees). The following, for example, is a meaningless fact: 'A play called "The Linden Tree" (1947) was written by Bradford-born English novelist, playwright and broadcaster J. B. Priestley'. I believe that the family in this play are called Linden but some symbolism is probably involved as well.

Also while I accept that popular culture may be important, to list the title of a song because it has the name of a tree in its title is not. Rwood128 (talk) 00:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

That is about summarize the reason why it is not good loading botanic articles with this kind of stuff. But I would apreciate a second oppinion fro PaleCloudedWhite Yngvadottir and Sminthopsis84 - if you two think I acted too quick in splitting Tilia and Lime tree in culture. ‎PaleCloudedWhite and Sminthopsis84 is working with botanics and Yngvadottir is an admin who knows about guidelines. However I think while literature, mytology and pop - songs can go to culture, plant as food and medicine is relevant. Hafspajen (talk) 00:11, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
I'd abstain from a discussion of that sort, since food and medical use *are* cultural to a botanist. I have no objection (except the same one, that insignificant items such as song titles or mention in one episode of a TV show get added and clutter everything). Sminthopsis84 (talk) 01:33, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
I am of the view that information about the cultural history of a plant species can very much add to an article, and wouldn't recommend its wholesale removal just because some information is trivial. By all means remove the trivial stuff, but scholarly and cited information should be retained. And if there's a great quantity of the latter, then yes, a "Cultural history of X" can be created and linked to, but I wouldn't favour such splitting of information as the default setting. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 22:51, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Christen Dalsgaard

Auf de Schwäb’sche Eisenbahne a Swab trainstation.

Hafspajen I don't know how to make the image larger. CorinneSD (talk) 19:29, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Also, did I do everything right? Why does it show up in my watchlist as if I had created a new page? I don't remember seeing that kind of thing in my watchlist before. CorinneSD (talk) 19:36, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

What-witch image? Hafspajen (talk) 19:42, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
you mean the nom, I guess. Hafspajen (talk) 20:00, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes. CorinneSD (talk) 23:50, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
"Castle by the river"
Regarding my last comment at WP Featured pictures regarding the image of the Charolais bull, I don't know if you understood that I did not agree with those who could not accept calling it a Charolais bull without genetic testing. I was doing what I could to try and get the image promoted. If you didn't agree with my approach, that's all right, but I wanted to be sure you knew I was supporting the image (even with the original title, or not). I thought the main objection of those who opposed the image was that they couldn't be sure it was a Charolais. CorinneSD (talk) 23:56, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Huh, gosh, I was happy that it was only half an hour was left... I wouldn't want to wait more for all the pretty girls in the world. I couldn't really count any longer all the arguments, this or that. I was so happy to end it. No more photos for me, thanks. I stick to the portrait of Cot's daughter. Hafspajen (talk) 04:48, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

まりも羊羹 I'm going to try to translate using Google translate. CorinneSD (talk) 15:41, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

It only comes out "Marimo Yokan", which doesn't help. Perhaps you could do a search with the English phrase on Google, and see what comes up. At first, I thought they were billiard balls (for the game), but then I saw that some had a little bump on them, so they can't be billiard balls. Then I thought they might be some kind of candy. I don't know. By the way, I see the photo of the feral bull was promoted. I was surprised. Well, that's good, I guess. CorinneSD (talk) 15:44, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't get the picture of the train station. Other than a depiction of a train and a train station, what is it supposed to be showing? It looks like the man going away from the viewer has knocked down a woman and is tripping (see the foot) of the man carrying glasses of beer. Is this a statement about a particular type of person? Why did you put the image here? Did you find it particularly interesting, or what? CorinneSD (talk) 15:50, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Maybe it was meant to illustrate a train station to Swabia. Or used of Swabs, some people don't like them. Anti Swabian sentiment ... Hafspajen (talk) 17:08, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Careful now! My great-grandmother was of Swabian descent.... Sca (talk) 14:12, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

......don't get me wrong, I like Swabians. They are more genuine somehow. Hafspajen (talk) 05:00, 11 February 2015 (UTC) I like the painting by Cot, but why did you put as a caption, "Portrait of the artist's daughter"? There is no girl, or even person, in the painting. The name of the painting is "Castle by the river". CorinneSD (talk) 15:52, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Don't you remember that you once asked the same question? Hafspajen (talk) 22:22, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
No. Where? When? I'm so glad to see (from looking at your talk page) that you and Sca are getting along again. (I sometimes wonder whether that whole episode was made up, that you've never stopped being friends, and that I fell for it (believed you), and that you were sitting back and enjoying my efforts to get you to become friends again.) Sca, can you translate the captions in that cartoon that Hafs posted just above, and explain what the cartoon is saying? CorinneSD (talk) 23:46, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
The German caption means there are good refreshments/snacks available on the railways in Swabia, – which when the cartoon was printed in 1915 was a region (not a state) that would have been served by several German state railways. (They all were merged in 1920 into the Reichsbahn, or German National Railway). Of course it's satire, apparently on the Swabian subculture. Sca (talk) 14:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Another article to work on

[18] suggested by Serten II. CorinneSD (talk) 00:05, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Serten II Thank you for asking me to look at the IPCC consensus article. I just looked at it. I think I'd like to do a bit of reading first, to understand the basics of the topic and some background. Then I will go through your draft article carefully. Just give me a day or two to get to it. CorinneSD (talk) 00:43, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

First lets rejoice about Humboldt on the main page today. Thank you for your help. Serten II (talk) 21:56, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Serten II Let me congratulate you! Congratulations! But I don't see it on the main page. Where is it? CorinneSD (talk) 22:19, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Order of St. Benedict

Hafspajen Would you please look at the latest edits to Order of St. Benedict. The last of three by the same editor is [19]. CorinneSD (talk) 22:15, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

All correct, no problems. Hafspajen (talk) 22:21, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
O.K. Why was "circa" in a double pair of curly brackets? That looks like a template. What does it do? CorinneSD (talk) 22:25, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
That is probably wrong. Info is correct, though. Hafspajen (talk) 23:06, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
I looked in MOS and found in two places that c. is preferred, but the template {{circa}} may also be used. I noticed upon looking at the info-box in the article on the Order of St. Benedict that there is a very light underline under "c.", and when one moves the mouse over it, the full word "circa" appears. I guess that's what the template does. CorinneSD (talk) 23:10, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Norwegian cuisine

Hafspajen After reading a recent comment on your page regarding Swedish food, I skimmed the articles on Swedish cuisine, Finnish cuisine, and Norwegian cuisine. I saw a photo of a pastry in the section Norwegian cuisine#Fruit and desserts that seemed awfully dark. I wonder if a better photo of this or other Norwegian pastry could be found. CorinneSD (talk) 22:40, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Sca...? CorinneSD (talk) 23:31, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Danish cuisine

Hafspajen or Sca I've been reading the article on Danish cuisine. I came across a sentence that puzzles me. It is in the last paragraph of the section Danish cuisine#Breakfast, and I'll copy the first part of it here:

  • Øllebrød is a thin porridge cooked on rye bread, hvidtøl, water and sugar,...

How can a porridge be cooked on rye bread? Should it be something like "a thin porridge cooked with rye bread..." or "a thin porridge made from rye bread..."? CorinneSD (talk) 22:58, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, it doesn't sound too appetizing. But I've still got to make sure the sentence is correct. CorinneSD (talk) 23:03, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
  • that's disgusting. - bleeh, it should say: Øllebrød is a thin porridge cooked with bits of rye bread, and beer, water and sugar- here you go, beer for breakfast... Hafspajen (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC).
I've seen that happen in ... guess where? ... Bavaria. Sca (talk) 14:05, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Babettes gæstebud, Jylland. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 01:38, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Could somebody tell me why, when I looked at this page today, the text in the last few sections, including some headings, is smaller than normal? I just found out why: User:Sca, when you added that comment about your great-grandmother, you forgot to put the closing "sup, so everything after that was made small. I just fixed it. User:Hafspajen I've never seen those little red squares before a user name before (in Edit Mode). What are those? CorinneSD (talk) 18:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Oops! Sorry. Sca (talk) 14:45, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
What red squares? Hafspajen (talk) 05:01, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
They're visible only in edit mode. They are toward the end of the section, above, on Tilia. One is before the "U" when you pinged PaleCloudedWhite, and the other is right after that, before just "PaleCloudedWhite". CorinneSD (talk) 14:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Bloemen in een terracotta vaas., Albertus Jonas Brandt, Eelke Jelles Eelkema, 1810 - 1824 - Zoeken - Rijksmuseum.jpg

I'd suggest, if you renominate with just this image, it'll likely pass. Splitting the vote often doesn't help. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:12, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Still Life with Flowers, Shells, a Shark's Head, and Petrifications, by Antoine Berjon. 1819
Adam Cuerden Thank you for telling me, Adam. Adam, do you mind if I ask you a few questions about this image?
1) Do you really like this image? I loved the painting in the version with the bright colors, but this one seems so dull. Is it worth promoting to FP in spite of the dull colors?
2) Why do you think the colors are so dull? Do you think the colors were brighter when the painting was first painted? Have the colors faded with age, or is the painting covered with a layer of varnish that itself has darkened? If the latter, can't the varnish be removed? If the painting was more colorful when first painted, and the darkening is due only to a covering layer of something like varnish, I don't understand why a museum would not remove that varnish layer. I'll be glad to re-nominate it if you think it is worth promoting to FP. CorinneSD (talk) 14:59, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
I don't think the original painting would be anywhere near as bright as the original file. I suspect, in all honesty, a lot of this comes down to the different mediums: monitors produce light, paintings don't, and I think the painting would be far more impressive in real life. That said, I do think it probably had brighter colours originally. A lot of dyes fade, remember, and I believe the 1820s would have been part of the period where experimenting with new dyes was common - isn't there a major British painter who used coal-tar-based dyes or something like that, and made a conservation nightmare as they're eating the painting?
But try this - remove your preconceptions from the other image, and look at the full-sized version. Once your eyes adjust to it on its own merits, it really is a fine, delicate painting. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:33, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I agree that it is a fine painting. The flowers are depicted in lovely, accurate detail, and overall the composition is excellent. I looked at this painting for comparison: . The colors are a bit brighter, but I noticed that the flowers, especially those at the bottom, are somewhat dull like those in the Brandt/Eelkema painting. CorinneSD (talk) 15:53, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
  • I am glad you nominated it again ... I am glad Adam insisted, I just - didn't wanted to tell you what to do. I don't like that much myself. I think you think much better all by yourself, but the painting is rather good. --Hafspajen (talk) 04:58, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Oh, good. I'm glad, and thank you. At least I learned something that I didn't know before, which is that one can nominate an image right after a failed nomination (in this case there were three alternate images that kind of confused everyone). I'm not crazy about this image because it's a little dull, but the detail and composition are fantastic. On this one, I kind of have to imagine it being a little brighter right after it was painted. It's too bad it has faded. CorinneSD (talk) 16:54, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Marcus Aurelius

Hafspajen Is this [20] correct formatting in Marcus Aurelius? CorinneSD (talk) 21:27, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it is one possible formating. Hafspajen (talk) 15:02, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Jean-Eugène Buland

Hafspajen Thanks for introducing me to Jean-Eugène Buland. Very interesting paintings. I made a few copy-edits to the article, but there are two sentences that are puzzling me. Perhaps they were translated from an article in French, but they sounds obscure and awkward in English:

1) In the middle of what looks like the second paragraph in "Biography" is the following sentence:

  • His participation in the Salon was compensated for by several awards: after an honorable mention at the Salon of 1879, he received a third place medal in 1884, followed by a second place medal in 1887.

The part that puzzles me is "His participation in the Salon was compensated for by..."

It sounds like "participation in the Salon" was an onerous (difficult or unpleasant) duty. I don't think that could the the case. What does this really mean? Does it mean that his participation in the Salon had some positive benefits, or that his participation led to the awards?

File:Jean Eugène Buland Almosen eines Bettlers 1880.jpg

2) At the beginning of what looks like the third paragraph in "Biography" is the following sentence:

  • He profited from the public commands emanating from the major institutions, such as the Musée du Luxembourg and other museums in the province.

The part that puzzles me is "He profited from the public commands emanating from..." This is definitely not colloquial English. What actually came to him from the major institutions? Commissions for paintings? Attention? Support? Praise?

If you could clarify these two things for me, I'd be glad to re-word the sentences so that they make sense. CorinneSD (talk) 16:59, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

  • Just added caption. Check the above. Hafspajen (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
  • You are right, the article is a translation from French and/or possibly written by French, the above sounds weird. Hafspajen (talk) 04:14, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

.'*It means: his participation led to the awards, of course. The other is less clear, commissions for paintings perhaps? Hafspajen (talk) 04:51, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Do you know the original source for this article? Was it translated from a WP article in another language? If so, we could look at the original and do a better translation for these lines. CorinneSD (talk) 17:03, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
  • HM; don't you think this is the artist himself? He painted himself as a beggar ... maybe in front of the Virgin? If it's not only

a speculation, it would be a very interesting FP self portrait.--Hafspajen (talk) 05:11, 14 February 2015 (UTC) http://artsalesindex.artinfo.com/asi/lots/4735121 doesn't say. Hafspajen (talk) 05:56, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

I wonder if you could try to find out if it was a self-portrait. If it wasn't an exact self-portrait, maybe it was a symbolic self-portrait. This painting is fantastic. Do you see how the painting is divided diagonally across the painting from upper left to lower right? The left probably represents purity and goodness and the right probably represents all the ugliness of earthly life: sin, poverty, etc. Wow! CorinneSD (talk) 17:00, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that's a good analisis, indeed. I think that the woman sitting there is the Vigin. I also think that the man is the painter, because he looks like him. A weird beggar this one, because if you check him he looks - intelligent, cultivated and almost noble in his traits. Yes he is, even if his cloth are ripped and old and very dirty- but it is a weird painting. Most probably an allergory, wish I COULD find out about it, I tried, but found nothing. Hafspajen (talk) 17:49, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
I think you're right. It does look like Buland. I find this a very moving scene. It's like he is saying, "I have very little to give you, but I give you what I can" (and his painting is what Buland can give of himself). CorinneSD (talk) 18:05, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Exactly. That's the idea. Hafspajen (talk) 19:45, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
This is what I found http://www.artrenewal.org/pages/artist.php?artistid=572 Hafspajen (talk) 21:20, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Franciscan

Hafspajen Do you approve of this change of image in Franciscan? [21] CorinneSD (talk) 17:02, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Sure. That is actually a portrait of Francie, made while he lived. Hafspajen (talk) 05:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
O.K. Thank you. CorinneSD (talk) 16:50, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Work in progress

I have been consolidating material moved from Cassava (about culinary use of cassava) to Cassava-based dishes (at the suggestion of two botanist editors, User:Sminthopsis84 and User:Peter coxhead). I am still working on the organization of the article. Is there a template I could put at the top of the page of Cassava-based dishes that indicates that the article is being worked on and not to edit until I have finished? I may need to continue this work tomorrow. CorinneSD (talk) 01:44, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Try {{inuse}}. --kelapstick(bainuu) 02:13, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Or {{Under construction}} for a more long-term solution; {{inuse}} is meant to stop others from editing to avoid edit conflicts. If you're not actively editing, prohibting others from doing so may not be necessary. Huon (talk) 02:18, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
kelapstick and Huon Thank you both! CorinneSD (talk) 16:49, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Kudos

Your copy-editing work is very fine. I appreciate it a lot, as I'm sure many other readers and editors do. Thank you. --Ori.livneh (talk) 08:08, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Ori.livneh Thank you so much! Your words mean a lot to me. CorinneSD (talk) 16:47, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Valentine's Day template

The Herald Hello, TH -- I saw your Valentine's Day template on Hafs' and Sca's talk pages. As someone who is interested in language, I just had to ask you whether "greet" is used as a noun in the variety of English you normally use (which variety I do not know). In American English, "greet" can only be a verb (I greet, you greet, he greets, etc.), not a noun. So "Valentine's Greets" is ungrammatical in American, and I believe also British, English. In American English, the noun is "a greeting" -- plural: "greetings". I'm just wondering what inspired you to choose that title for your template. CorinneSD (talk) 23:32, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

P.S. You have a very interesting user page, and I enjoy reading your cheerful comments on FP and on Hafs' talk page. CorinneSD (talk) 23:33, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Need help with a translation

Yngvadottir, Sca Can you translate an image file name for me? It's for a photo of a vase that I've had on my user page for a while. I copied the file name and added it in the caption after what I had there ("Beautiful glass vase") and tried to get a translation using Google translate, but nothing came up.

Beautiful glass vase - Váza s motivem zimní krajiny, vyrobená v roce 1905, akciovou společností Bárta a spol. ve Františkodole


Also, Hafspajen I saw a note in the file information that the author/creator is unknown. Is there any way you can find out more? CorinneSD (talk) 23:46, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Probably not. Not without checing the bottom of it. Hafspajen (talk) 17:40, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Cake

Vsmith V, I need an American editor's opinion. See Talk:Cake#Cake as a dessert?. CorinneSD (talk) 18:34, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Cassava-based dishes

Peter coxhead Yesterday, I finished integrating the material I removed from Cassava (on culinary uses) into Cassava-based dishes. I put the material in the right country-section, deleted duplicate material, and made a few copy-edits. With regarding to Cassava-based dishes#Africa, I just added the material from the Cassava article but didn't do any organizing because it was in a different format from the other regions (it's sentences and paragraphs rather than country by country).

Before I begin a complete re-organization of the article, I want to ask you whether you like the organization as it is now or not. I had suggested to Sminth (and you), in her now-archived section on Cassava, that I remove the country sub-headings, leave the larger region headings, and, within each region, list the main dishes. I would list the dish, then describe it, then list the names of the dish in the various countries.

For example,

Caribbean

  • Cassava bread (casabe bread) - Description - name (country A), name (country B)
  • Boiled or steamed cassava - Description - name (country C), name (country D)
  • Cassava cake - (etc.)

Central America

(etc.)

I think there is a lot of unnecessary repetition and description in the article, and this would make a shorter and more concise article. Sminth said this idea sounds good, but I'd also really like your opinion on this before I begin. CorinneSD (talk) 23:38, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Adélaïde Labille-Guiard

Hafspajen I've been reading the article on Adélaïde Labille-Guiard, and I've made a few minor copy-edits. I have come across something that needs fixing. The last paragraph of the section Adélaïde Labille-Guiard#Marriages, a single sentence, is as follows:

  • On 8 June 1799, Labille-Guiard remarried François-André Vincent, winner of the Prix de Rome in 1768 and a member of the Royal Academy.

Notice the date that is given for the marriage.

In the caption of the picture of François-André Vincent right next to the Marriages section, it says they married in 1800. It also says 1800 in the article on him. 1800 may or may not be a round number, and "8 June 1799" is an exact date. Can you look into this and see which is correct? CorinneSD (talk) 00:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Hm, re-married? Hafspajen (talk) 03:15, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Looks like she was much more interesting woman than the article gives the impression of, This say

Adélaïde Labille-Guiard, was admitted into the Academy on the same day in May of 1783 as Vigee-Lebrun, and perhaps even had more talent, yet her name is unfamiliar to most. Labille-Guiard did not come from an artistic family; her father was a shopkeeper, far from being an aristocrat. Thankfully her father did have a contact in the art world,such as François-Elie Vincent, the miniaturist. Vincent’s workshop was next to her father’s storefront. Adelaide started her tutelage with F.E.Vincent in 1763, and by 1769 she had become so skilled in the art that she was admitted to the Academie de St Luc. 1769 was also the same year in which she married for the first time and started her studies with Maurice-Quentin de La Tour, from whom Adelaide learned and perfected the technique of chalk pastel. She worked exclusively as a portraitist as early as the age of 19, and continued working in that genre till her death in 1803.Adelaide Labille-Guiard had a much different life than her contemporary, Vigee-Lebrun. Labille-Guiard was the youngest of eight children, her parents essentially merchants. She constantly went against the “norm” for her gender, being the only female pupil in a male dominated workshop at the age of fourteen. She seems to have quit her apprenticeship with de La Tour sometime during 1774, which is also the same year she started to exhibit her works at the Académie de St Luc. ... She also had a keen knack for capturing their character and personality through body language, facial expression and props that pertained to their profession, status, or hobby. This was also a trait of her tutor, Maurice Quentin de La-tour. Labille-Guiard also portrayed her sitters giving a direct gaze to the viewer in the majority of her works, which was in direct opposition to the work of Elizabeth Vigee-Lebrun. Another distinct difference in their stylistic approach is in the dress of their sitters: Labille-Guiard portrayedher sitters in modern, contemporary fashions, while Vigee-Lebrunpreferred to show her sitters wearing neoclassical attire - ... Adelaide also battled criticism from the public and art critics,who said she was plain, uneducated, ... Along with success, come those who try to bring the successful down. It is something those in the public eye have apparently dealt with-for centuries: one may see it today on the cover of any grocery store tabloid. And so it was in for Adelaide Labille-Guiard. There was a controversial and “crass” poem printed and circulated throughout Paris about Labille-Guiard, essentially stating she had traded sexual favors for help with her paintings from François-André Vincent. The “poem” even went as far as to accuse her of having two thousand lovers, a play on words using Andre’ Vincent’s last name. It is now assumed that the author of this“poem” was her ex-husband', though it could never be proven (Aucchio). Labille-Guiard persevered however, and sought justice for herself and all other female artists to come after her. Adelaide Labille-Guiard was a feminist, fighting for the rights of woman within the academy and all of French society. Her career and life hold historical importance: she set precedence that all female artists in Paris thereafter her could use to their advantage. She was the first Parisian woman artist to overcome the obstacle“…of a non-artistic family background of low social class, of an unsuccessful marriage (the situation at least left her free to pursue her career), and of an Academy that admitted few woman and then only grudgingly with limited privileges”

  • And what a shitty ex. Nicolas Guiard, a clerk with the Receiver General of the Clergy of France... Well, what shithead. I suppose clerk in this case is not the same as clergyman, but still... And if it is, then it is even worse. I have little tolerance with Christian people who declare themselves as Christians and then just don't give a fuck for the most elementary Christian values, like being forgiving. Hafspajen (talk) 03:55, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Wow! So much passionate feeling! I think "clerk" really means just "clerk" here -- a low-level secretary in an office. I was going to ask you about an edit you made after I had edited the article. Right after it says she remarried Vincent, you added a sentence saying "She married...". You don't need to say "she married" (same person) if you have already said "she remarried" that person. It's got to be one or the other. CorinneSD (talk) 01:48, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Corinne, I am a good Christian. I take this very seriously. Nobody has to be a Christian at all, the choice is free. But once you are - don't mock God, and don't crucify Christ once more, that will not do. Hebrews 6:6. Hafspajen (talk) 12:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Juliëtte Wytsman

Because I noticed that you have one of Juliëtte Wytsman's paintings on your user page, you might be interested to know that I've just created her article. – Editør (talk) 00:30, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Editør Thanks for letting me know. I look forward to reading it. I'm still puzzled by the diaeresis over the "e" in "Juliëtte". I studied French for many years and don't remember seeing that. Do you know if she spelled her name that way? CorinneSD (talk) 00:44, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Both Trullemans and Wytsman are Dutch/Flemish names, and in the Dutch language you use a diaeresis to separare the "i" and "e" sounds: "ie" is pronounced as /i/ and "ië" is pronounced as /iɛ/; so theoretically the name could be spelled either the French way without diaeresis or the Dutch way with diaeresis. – Editør (talk) 08:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Oh, thank you. I didn't know that Dutch uses diacritics. Is it known how she signed her own name? CorinneSD (talk) 14:53, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
P.S. I don't know why your user name appears in red. I just copied and pasted from your signature. CorinneSD (talk) 14:54, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
It seems that she signed her name without diaeresis: [22] [23]; which is confirmed by the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium: [24]. But the RKD website says she signed her name as "Juliette Wijtsman": [25]; see also IJ (digraph). (The page User:Editør does not exist.) – Editør (talk) 16:55, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the information and the links. (It was a treat to see more of her paintings.) I'm not trying to make a big deal of this. It's not that important. It's just that I like things to be logical. If she didn't sign her name with the diaeresis, why add it in the WP article? Also, I'm just curious, why don't you have a user page? CorinneSD (talk) 17:48, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
I had based the title on the Dutch article, but other sources all write her name as Juliette Wytsman, so I'll change it accordingly. – Editør (talk) 10:50, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/In a pine wood - Study
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Christen Dalsgaard - In a pine wood. Study - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 19:39, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Franciscan

Hafspajen Are you keeping an eye on Franciscan? [26] and subsequent edit. CorinneSD (talk) 01:43, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, same editor, alright. Hafspajen (talk) 23:08, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
In my comment at Francis of Assisi, I almost wrote that I thought that editor's statement saying what the word "contemporary" means was insulting to you, but I didn't. CorinneSD (talk) 23:12, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Benjamin Haydon

Ruskinmonkey I saw your recent edits to Benjamin Haydon, particularly this group: [27]. I have studied them carefully and am inclined to revert the entire lot, but since I believe you made the edits in good faith, and you obviously like to write, I thought that instead of subjecting you to the shock of having all your edits undone, I would offer to work with you. I felt that, on balance, the way it was written was better than the way you have written it. I think you unnecessarily made the sentences wordier, removed some important pieces of information and added some unimportant details. If you'd like, I can be specific on each one of these. I just don't understand the reason for your re-writing perfectly good prose. There are one or two places that could have been improved, but I would have made only minor changes to achieve that. CorinneSD (talk) 00:54, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for saving me from the shock of reversion. Though I am indeed a tender and delicate being I a prepared to put up a robust defence of my edits. My recent changes to the article have not lengthened it, or (with the exception perhaps of one deletion) significantly altered the content. (I have not previously edited it for almost two years). What I have done is remove some archaisms and obscurities inherited from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica, and tried to mould the text into something that would give the modern reader a more neutral idea of what Haydon was actually about, rather than buying into his own sense of himself as a martyr.Ruskinmonkey (talk) 03:45, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Ruskinmonkey I'm not sure what you mean by archaisms and obscurities (no need to explain), but upon re-reading your version, I guess it's not too bad. The only sentence I was going to ask you about was the one I see you have fixed, the one about the commission charged with choosing the artists. What didn't you like about "the young artist"? He was about 21. CorinneSD (talk) 23:15, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Bryson Burroughs

Bryson Burroughs - June

Bryson Burroughs - have you heard of him? Hafspajen (talk) 13:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

No, I hadn't heard of him, but the painting looks somehow familiar, as though I've seen his paintings before. Do you think his paintings have been used as illustrations for children's books? It's lovely, and thank you for posting it here. Do you like it? CorinneSD (talk) 23:04, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
We should really have an article om him, this is a good painter. American. Hafspajen (talk) 06:57, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Jan Toorop 2

Hafspajen You will have seen that I changed the image at the top of this page to a painting by Jan Toorop. I really like this painting. I just used Google Translate to translate the word "Broek" (see the caption), and it translated it as "Pants". That doesn't seem to have anything to do with the painting. CorinneSD (talk) 00:58, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Too abstract for me. I like paintings that have some beauty in them. I don't see much beauty in this one. CorinneSD (talk) 23:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Well, I can't say I don't agree. it sucks, but it is .. modern. Hafspajen (talk) 20:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

La Laguna Cathedral

Hi, thanks for improving this article.--31.4.52.106 (talk) 22:03, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

User:31.4.52.106 You're welcome. I've enjoyed reading it as I have been working on it. I have done the best I can. Things that I couldn't figure out I left alone ( = did not change). Either User:ScitDei could help with remaining issues (problems in translation), or I could continue to work on it with you. If you want me to do that, I would list problem sentences or phrases ( = groups of words) here. You could then tell me what you mean to say in Spanish, and I could put that into English, perhaps with ScitDei's help.
On another issue, I suggest that you register as a user. Adopt a user name and register an account. CorinneSD (talk) 22:27, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Don't ask me to help if your friend goes and messes up everything I do and adds back low quality pictures and removes the good ones. Nobody is interested in a lampost outside the building. Hafspajen (talk) 23:52, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Put it back where it was. Hafspajen (talk) 23:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hafs What do you mean? Do you mean that you have put the image back where it was? User:31.4.52.106 I suggest you defer to User:Hafspajen's judgment regarding images. If there is a particular image you want to add, or if you have any questions about images, feel free to ask Hafspajen. S/He is very knowledgeable about images. A lot of editors have learned from him/her, and you can, too. Regarding the text of the article, let me know if you'd like me to work with you and help you get certain words, phrases and sentences that are at this moment still unclear into English. CorinneSD (talk) 00:00, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

This is a crappy picture of a lampost that your friend keeps adding back to article - removing good quality pictures that illustrate the article well. This picture has nothing to do in the article, it shows a palm tree and a lampost. I am not interested working with him, sorry. Hafspajen (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Hafs, since I merely copy-edited an article after seeing a request on another editor's talk page in which s/he admitted to being a non-native speaker of English and asked for help editing this article, I wouldn't yet consider this editor my friend. This user may not even know how to find these comments again. I just left a note on his/her talk page (which contains nothing else but the welcome I put there), and even if s/he does find them, s/he may not even understand them. Don't give up yet. I've got to be sure we've got his/her attention. If necessary, I will tell him/her in Spanish to leave the images alone. CorinneSD (talk) 20:18, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
P.S. I agree that that photo showing lampposts and a palm tree is not a good one. I could barely find the dome that the caption mentioned. CorinneSD (talk) 20:19, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Yeah. Hafspajen (talk) 21:54, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Edit request for Sophie Hunter page

There is a one-sentence paragraph in Hunter's lead that could be easily merged with the first. There is no reason for it to be separate from the main one. Please be so kind to merge them, please. Thank you! 180.191.69.3 (talk) 02:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Blooms in a Terracotta Vase
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Bloemen in een terracotta vaas., Albertus Jonas Brandt, Eelke Jelles Eelkema, 1810 - 1824 - Zoeken - Rijksmuseum.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 16:06, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Dari

Hello, I am hope you are fine. I am not very active in Wikipedia anymore, because I have a lot to do in "real life". As for Dari: the whole article has become a battle ground of users with obvious political agenda. Fron a scholarly point of view, there is no doubt that "Dari"is just a word, a name, propagated politically since the 1960's, in order to alienate the people of Afghanistan from the word "Persian". Of course, the language known as "Dari" is nothing else but "Persian". Calling the various dialects of Persian in Afghanistan "Dari" instead of "Persian" is a political thing, not a scholarly one.

Wikipedia should stay politically neutral and present to scholarly view, that is: Dari is just a political name propagated by the Afghan government (which - by the way - has always been dominated by Pashtuns who do not speak Persian). That's also what Encyclopaedia Iranica writes.

--Lysozym (talk) 17:48, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Lysozym I'm sorry you are not very active on WP anymore. You are needed. Thank you for taking the time to leave me this note. I'm not much interested in the politics. As you can see from my user page, I'm mostly interested in improving the clarity of the prose in articles and in fixing little mistakes I come across. If you have time, would you look at something in Dari language? In the section Dari language#Vocabulary, there is a small table with two columns labeled "Persian-Farsi" and "Persian-Dari". All the words in these columns should be infinitives, to correspond to the English infinitives down the left. They should all end in "-dan". In the Persian-Dari column, two alternate verbs are given in each box – I believe one is similar to the Persian-Farsi verb and the other is different. For the English verb "to understand", two Persian-Dari forms are given. They appear to be "fah-mi-dan" and "fa-mi-di". The second one of these does not have the "-dan" ending; it has "-di" at the end; it also looks awfully similar to "fah-mi-dan" - only the "h" is missing. For all the other verbs, the second Persian-Dari verb was quite different from the first one. I think that is an error, but since I'm not sure, I thought I'd point it out to you. CorinneSD (talk) 22:49, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Huh

What Marsalokxx ? can't find it. Hafspajen (talk) 21:53, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

I saw it when I clicked on that picture of the boats. I was just teasing. You can remove the whole comment if you wish. I was also thinking of adding a picture of a lemon meringue pie to your page in honor of the new background color. Why are you feeling blue? CorinneSD (talk) 22:01, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Yeah. You sent me running around looking for vandalism .. at lox article. Where I discovered a guy who wrote "pregnant lox [ gravid - in Swedish], but still didn't got the connection ... Hafspajen (talk) 22:06, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Sorry about that. (Next time just click on the picture first.) Where is Marsalokxx? (When I went back to your page to look, I saw that I had left out the "k" before the "xx", so I added it. CorinneSD (talk) 22:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

I looked at the Lox and Gravlax articles but don't see anything about a pregnant lox. How can lox be pregnant? It's brined salmon. Anyway, we're getting further and further from the picture of the boats. CorinneSD (talk) 22:14, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

HE made a mistake, wrote GRAVID lax instead of GRAVAD LAX,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lox&diff=645698399&oldid=645698282 let Peter Isotalo explain it for you the difference. Hafspajen (talk) 22:27, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Is that picture of the gorilla there to show me how you're feeling right now? CorinneSD (talk) 22:33, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
I haven't had a whole lot of exchanges with Peter, but I am very impressed by his knowledge of linguistics. CorinneSD (talk) 23:09, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
From grava ("to dig"); related to "grave" and comes from Germanic roots blah-blah-blah.
From Latin gravis ("heavy").[28]
Spoken words are, like, nothing like each other, as you can clearly see from the IPA. I mean, different contour tones and like totally not even the same phonological syllable weight! Well, you get the picture.
someone who couldn't possibly be Peter (who is pocketed) 23:24, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Hafs Wow! Those are interesting pages! I guess "pocketing" is a metaphorical break in a cozy place. I was looking at the images, and in the large group of pictures of desserts, there is an image that has disappeared. It's just a blank space. Perhaps Bish has not seen it. By the way, you never answered my question: What is Marsalokxx? In other words, where was that picture of blue boats taken? CorinneSD (talk) 00:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Marsaxlokk? Hafspajen (talk) 00:56, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
They are probably Luzzu's. Hafspajen (talk) 01:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Oh...beautiful little boats. Thank you. CorinneSD (talk) 16:32, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Kerman

Hafspajen Hafs, I just finished copy-editing the article on Kerman. It took me more than an hour. I noticed that some of the images are not so great, particularly the slim image of the mosque with the blue dome, at the right. I'm sure a better image of that mosque can be found. Can you try to find a better one? You'll see what the mosque is called in the "Summary" section on the image file page. CorinneSD (talk) 00:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Can't really find any... Hafspajen (talk) 01:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Corinne/Archive_12&oldid=1143370046"