User talk:Stonemad GB

Welcome!

Hello, Stonemad GB, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Robdurbar 09:02, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling changes[edit]

I reverted your spelling change in Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. Please review the recent history of the article, where this battle has been fought out. -- Donald Albury 12:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Le Corbusier[edit]

You know, after reading your comment on my talk page, I have to agree somewhat. It seems my support of Frank Lloyd Wright, or more rather my opposition to Le Corbusier, is due to my North American bias, as we see more of the former's style around here. I have changed my vote to support Le Corbusier, but I still vote keep on Frank Lloyd Wright. ♠ SG →Talk 10:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Thanks for your comments re the featured biography page. I had to bring up the Frank Lloyd Wright thing though - I am very curious as to how anyone could think him more important and influential than Le Corbusier. LC was probably the most important pioneer of Modernist architecture, whose ideas, buildings and techniques transformed the face of most cities in the twentieth century. FLW was certainly famous and talented, but had virtually no influence on architecture: rather like Gaudi, he will be remembered as taking architecture up an interesting cul-de-sac.--Stonemad GB 23:58, 15 September 2006 (UTC)"

Hi there, Stonemad and SG - I just stumbled across your exchanges here and thought I should comment:- That's a bold statement indeed to say that FLW had nearly no influence on architecture - FLW early 1910 catalogue, the Wasmuth Portfolio and visit to europe is cited as directly influencing the Dutch Neoplasticist, De Stijl group and also Walter Gropius and the Bauhaus and from there a great deal of architecture, including Corbusier. --Mcginnly | Natter 12:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who is nominating what and where? FLW greatest of the C20 - pish! 'One of' - yes. Why does there have to be one? Corb, Gropius, Mies, Aalto, Saarinen, Kahn, Mendelsohn, Scarpa - the list is irreducible and meaningless, like who's the greatest musician.--Mcginnly | Natter 22:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NC(GN)[edit]

I apologize for spamming your talk page, but since you had contributed in the past to the WP:NC(GN) proposal, which is currently ready for a wider consultation, I thought you might want to give it another look now and, hopefully, suggest some final improvements. Thanks. --Lysy^talk 22:57, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Richard the Lionheart and Sex[edit]

You seem like a fair guy, so I was wondering if you could help resolve the tiff between Silverwhistle and I on Richard's sexuality. I think the problem is that my edits make the straight theory seem bigoted and that Silverwhistle's make the gay theory seem liberal and fantastical. I was thinking we could pour all our arguments into a new section marked 'Sexual Orientation.' Would you support this and help us? How can we resolve this without venom? Augustulus 02:14, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EG[edit]

Well I've not had anything to do with the British Empire page, so I can't really comment on what's been going on there. I'm far too personally involved to act as an admin in this case.

What you do is up to you. I'm hoping he will change his behaviour and so - for now - I've decided I'm not gonna take any of this any further. However, as far as you or anyone else are concerned, if you were to make a report at the personal attacks section of the Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard, then I imagine that the judging admin would give out a short ban; as has been pointed out to me, I'm not sure whether this would be counter-intuitive or not. --Robdurbar 07:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]