User talk:Cassianto/Archive 2
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
FAC discussion at Ian Fleming
Hello Cassianto, thanks for your message—I understand your frustration. However, I've made it my policy only to get involved in discussions of entries to which I've contributed in the past, and, therefore, I don't want to give my opinion either way here. I can see both the benefits and shortcomings of infoboxes, but I'm unable to come down on one side with this particular article. I'm sorry to have to recuse myself and hope that the issue can be resolved and the entry be improved to meet FA requirements. Best, Malljaja (talk) 13:59, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- No worries at all. I completely understand your reluctance. When I have to deal with people like this it makes me wonder why I bothered too! -- CassiantoTalk 16:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Request
If you have time, maybe you would do me a small favour? My article Reginald Heber is at PR awaiting comments (the ever-faithful Wehwalt has responded, but I need more!}. Heber isn't as interesting or exciting as Peter Sellers, but the article isn't nearly as long. I would welcome your thoughts. Brianboulton (talk) 15:59, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Re: Late Spring
Due to other commitments, I have not had time to upgrade the Late Spring page until now. I have responded to your concerns on the Late Spring archive page and addressed them. In one case, you questioned several aspects of the same passage, which were caused merely by my incorrect and unclear quotation marks in the passage (something I'm usually more careful about), and I corrected these. I have crossed out all your text relating to objections that I have responded to and corrected, as per your instructions.
I am planning to nominate the article soon as a Featured Article. I would be thrilled if you would support its promotion. Thanks so much for your input and general help! Dylanexpert (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
- Not a problem, I will update the PR. I didn't find anything else of note by the way. We don't really Support on PR's (usually reserved for FAC's), but if your asking "would I support at FAC" then the answer would be "yes!" :-) -- CassiantoTalk 00:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
- Late Spring is now a Featured Article candidate, and since the article is being attacked by a "troll," I could really use some help! Thanks. Dylanexpert (talk) 10:39, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
- I regret that you either did not view the above comment or chose not to act on it while my article was a Featured Article Candidate, because you did not support it and the article was not promoted. However, I will perform major revisions on the article based on the comments I've had. I will then nominate the revised article as a FAC and hopefully you will be able to support it at that point. My goal is to make the article a Today's Featured Article by Ozu's 109th birthday on December 12, 2012. Dylanexpert (talk) 02:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
- Late Spring is now a Featured Article candidate, and since the article is being attacked by a "troll," I could really use some help! Thanks. Dylanexpert (talk) 10:39, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
FLC
I'll look at it again tomorrow.—indopug (talk) 13:45, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
- I went and capped the comments I made since I'm happy with what was done. Unfortunately, as a director I really can't show any "allegiance", or to put it plainly support, since I'm the one who will most likely close the FLC when the time comes. Hopefully the FLC won't take too much longer, since there are plenty of older ones to worry about. Giants2008 (Talk) 17:24, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, its my first time at FLC so not sure of the workings behind it. I thought it was like FAC where supports and opposes are given on the back of resolved comments. Many thanks for getting back to me. -- CassiantoTalk 23:05, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
- FLC actually is like FAC in that supports come after comments are resolved, but FAC directors don't like to support much either. It's that whole avoiding COI issue. Giants2008 (Talk) 16:25, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, its my first time at FLC so not sure of the workings behind it. I thought it was like FAC where supports and opposes are given on the back of resolved comments. Many thanks for getting back to me. -- CassiantoTalk 23:05, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Oops!
Hello Cassianto, I'm removing the warning I left on your talk page and reverting my own edits to Peter Sellers. Sorry about that. Fraggle81 (talk) 23:29, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Dan Leno
Please stop. Wait till I have sorted out your cut-and-paste move, and then tell me if more changes are needed. JohnCD (talk) 19:43, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Highbeam
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Do you have Wikipedia:HighBeam/Applications?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:32, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
- I do yes. What shall I search for. Which search brings up the best information? -- CassiantoTalk 18:07, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Request
Hi. I was wondering if you could leave comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Say Hello to My Little Friend/archive1. Thanks! TBrandley 02:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 05:01, 4 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thanks, TBrandley 05:01, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Sorry about that
I accidentally made a couple edits after you added the {{wait}} tag just now. I was trying to time the edits while you were asleep, but I guess I waited too long. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:20, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
- No worries, my fault. I'm up for work and getting a few in before I clock on for the day as my time will be limited. Finished now I'll remove the flag. Great comments by the way! -- CassiantoTalk 04:43, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Sellers
I've left the following note on Schrodinger's talkpage. I am concerned.
I am sorry to introduce a negative voice into this discussion, but I would rather express it here than on the FAC page. In its short spell at FAC, the article has grown by 4500 words, over 50% of its former length, in response to the criticism that the article lacked sufficient detail and critical comment on Sellers' films. While the criticism itself was reasonable, the response has been ridiculous overkill, leaving the article bloated and overdetailed—13000 words, near enough. Had it appeared in this form when I peer reviewed it a couple of weeks ago, I would have recommended considerable pruning. The films have their own articles and that, surely, is where the detailed comments belong; in this article a few examples of critical opinions on Sellers' performances would have been perfectly adequate. When I completed my peer review I thought the article was close to FA standard and with a little more work could be got there; I looked forward to giving it my support. Now, it looks like a different article, and I will need to review it all over again; are the nominators really convinced that this drastic treatment has improved it?
Good wishes, Brianboulton (talk) 13:05, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Editor's Barnstar |
| For a great new starter article on Joseph Samuel Grimaldi. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:18, 10 August 2012 (UTC) |
- Ah, thank you Dr.B! And many thanks for taking on the laborious task of adding the categories. :-) -- CassiantoTalk 12:36, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Grooveshark
Grooveshark? Really? They have been sued so many times for copyright infringement... just see the article about them here. This is not a good EL. Seriously. Doc talk 13:24, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oh really. Sorry my mistake. Stanley Holloway had a link to Grooveshark which is why I added it (nobody told me any different). I will set about deleting both. Thanks for the heads up Doc! -- CassiantoTalk 13:29, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
- Noprob! Consider them like YouTube, but with even less legitimate room to operate when it comes to their considering copyvios. Cheers :> Doc talk 13:34, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
- There's a bunch of essays that more or less cover this (one, two, three, four, five, maybe more), but basically:
Onlookers (like me) who are new to a discussion (ie. I've only been following this latest flare-up for a week, though I have years of background following infobox disputes), will only see the most recent remarks in the daily flow. Eg. I see Tim's note below, and my respect for you goes up; but then I see you being horrifically rude ([1]saying in essense "I wish you had a fatal-disease") in remarks on another user's talkpage and my trust in your statements elsewhere goes down.
The person you're directing remarks at, isn't the only one reading the words you choose! (Or, same thing from another perspective "Everything you hit 'save' on, can and will be used against you. Edit and preview yourself, this isn't a race, or a battleground. There's a diverse crowd of intelligent humanoids reading, and we don't want flame. It's kinda unanimous. Flame is bad.").
tl;dr Please be the kind of person you'd like everyone else to also be. 'Tis the best of habits. Sincerely, :) -- Quiddity (talk) 08:47, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
- People can only take so much abuse before reacting. When the abuser bewilderingly gets away with it repeatedly, it's even more tempting to respond. So shame on you, Cassianto, for not continually taking the abuse that others freely get away with, and feeding into it! If he had kept his yap shut about me I would have remained silent about his escalating obnoxious behavior. He couldn't do that, and my "voluntary" interaction ban with him (put forth in good faith) is over. He's been pissing a lot of people off recently and making some long-term good-faith editors leave. That is bullshit, and plenty of others are aware of it and are clearly displeased about it. Doc talk 09:09, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
- There's a bunch of essays that more or less cover this (one, two, three, four, five, maybe more), but basically:
- I hate to break it to you Quiddity, but he is not actually a rabbit, therefore not biologically capable of getting Myxomatosis. The Myxomatosis joke is based on his user name. If I had said cancer, aids, meningitis, I could understand (and expect) you to take action against me. Of course, I wish none of these conditions to be inflicted upon him as wishing so would be sick.
- BR, IMO, comes accross as an odious person whom I have unfortunately met over the last week or so. My assessment of him is based on his uncivil responses to me and many of my esteemed collegues, such as Doc, SchroCat, MistyMorn, Tim riley, Dr.Blofeld and a whole host of others. What with Tim and MistyMorn leaving (I suspect as a result of BR's incivility), his continual sniping, his rude shorthand edit summaries and his insistence on inflicting his crazy and obsessive rules around info boxes, practically forcing my current FAC to it's knees, I think a quick lighthearted jibe at a biologically impossible disease is a small price to pay.
- I take on board what you say and he certainly won't be hearing from me on his overlong talk page. "People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones", "Get as good as you give" etc are a number of Maxim's I can think of off the top of my head which justify my comment; and one which I shall not apologise for making. -- CassiantoTalk 09:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Hail and farewell
I am sending this note to Wikipedians with whom I have most closely collaborated over the last six years or so. After pondering hard during a month's wiki-break in July I have sadly decided to withdraw fully from contributing. I have been worn down by continual carping, sniping and belittling from a wearisome few (you know the sort of people I refer to); the joy has gone out of taking part in this wonderful enterprise. I should be more resilient, but alas it's finally got to me.
Working with you has been a pleasure and a privilege: I count myself fortunate to have had such colleagues. My warmest wishes go with you for the future. I shall be happy to do any research, copy-editing, fact-checking etc you may ever feel inclined to ask me to do – but safely offline.
With my very best wishes,
Tim. (Tim riley (talk) 15:54, 10 August 2012 (UTC))
Hi
Hi Cassianyo. Can you tell me who else left the project and where the discussions that led up to this are, please? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 19:51, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, Tim riley left yesterday. It was a result of Georg Solti appearing on the main page and the addition of an info box by a drive by editor. IMO, Br'er Rabbit, and a few others also forced him out. See here. There is a tribute on his page and a big thing going on here. It makes for some very uncomfortable reading and a great sense of loss is tainted throughout. All the best. -- CassiantoTalk 20:04, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you, Cassianto. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 22:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
- Cassianto, thank you - I was very touched by your concern. I've followed your work from a distance, and felt rather bad when I gave you only a brief reply some time ago on my talk page (I remember my little head being crammed with other edits at the time).
I see you also feel Tim's loss at a personal level and can really understand that. He is a wonderful mentor to have, and always a real human and thoughtful presence.
Look forward to working with you in the future, when maybe I come out of hiding! Best, —MistyMORN 21:51, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Main page appearance: Stanley Holloway
This is a note to let the main editors of Stanley Holloway know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on August 18, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 18, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Stanley Holloway (1890–1982) was an English stage and film actor, comedian, singer, poet and monologist. He was famous for his comic and character roles on stage and screen, especially that of Alfred P. Doolittle in My Fair Lady. He was also renowned for his comic monologues and songs, which he performed and recorded throughout most of his 70-year career. He had his first major theatre success in Kissing Time in 1919. In 1921, he joined a concert party, The Co-Optimists, and his career began to flourish. Characters from his monologues such as Sam Small, invented by Holloway, and Albert Ramsbottom, created for him by Marriott Edgar, were absorbed into popular British culture, and Holloway developed a following for the recordings of his many monologues. At the outbreak of World War II, Holloway made short propaganda films on behalf of the British Film Institute and Pathé News and took character parts in a series of war films including Major Barbara, The Way Ahead, This Happy Breed and The Way to the Stars. In 1956 he was cast as the irresponsible Alfred P. Doolittle in My Fair Lady. The role brought him international fame. In his later years, Holloway appeared in television series in the US and the UK, toured in revues, appeared in stage plays in Britain, Canada, Australia and the US. (more...)
UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
- I saw it and immediately knew it was your's, before I'd even checked the contributors. Many congratulations. KJP1 (talk) 07:29, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- Precious again, the "irresponsible Alfred P. Doolittle", - thank you, awesome Wikipedian of 21 June 2012, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks guys! Even more special as Holloway was my first FA as a lone nominator and first introduced me to Wikipedia. -- CassiantoTalk 08:18, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- Celebrate! Gives me the idea to try something like it with the first article I ever wrote, to fill a red link. But Kafka first, not lone, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:30, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks guys! Even more special as Holloway was my first FA as a lone nominator and first introduced me to Wikipedia. -- CassiantoTalk 08:18, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- Precious again, the "irresponsible Alfred P. Doolittle", - thank you, awesome Wikipedian of 21 June 2012, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar!! Let's hope it passes then!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:10, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Special Barnstar |
| For exceptional work on getting Peter Sellers to FA status and tolerating the nonsense when the going got tough. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC) |
A barnstar for you!
|
The Teamwork Barnstar |
| Thanks for all your efforts on Peter Sellers, without which it wouldn't have got through FAC. Thanks also for providing sanity even when illogical insanity seemed to be the basis of at least one editor's rationale for involvement! Cheers - SchroCat (^ • @) 18:10, 19 August 2012 (UTC) |
- Like a bus, two come along at once! Thanks guys, here's to many more collaborations I hope! -- CassiantoTalk 19:41, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Conan Doyle
Thanks for your message. I choose 'Life and work' because the whole article is a biography. WP:IMAGE says that images should be right aligned by default, except when the subject is facing right and that the text shouldn't be sandwiched. More space between the images is fine as long as the images are near the appropriate text. Hope that helps. Span (talk) 21:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- No probs, I adopt "Biography". I know the File policy only too well. I'm using an IPad, and there is no text squeeze, so please excuse my error. :-) -- CassiantoTalk 22:06, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Re: Sense and Sensibility
Thanks! I'm preparing for a FA push, though the article still could use a lot of work (especially in the production, analysis, and legacy sections). It's a very significant film with lots of scholarship that deserves to have that little gold star. It's going to peer review eventually (probably not in the immediate future), so I'll ping you when it's there (no obligation to weigh in of course, just outwardly expressing my plans)! Ruby 2010/2013 23:24, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for your copy edits and comments, particularly the ones concerning UK dates and currency. That was an issue that came up with my last FA, so I'll be sure to spend more time on them. Also, all the small sections are to be expanded - I would never allow ones so short to be seen by those picky FA eyes! Ruby 2010/2013 17:02, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
John Le Mesurier
Hi, can we work on this in the mainspace?♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:55, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Ooo sorry, I just noticed your tag. I'll leave you to it for a few hours. Let me know when you're done!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Request
Hey. I was wondering if you could leave some comments at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The X-Files episodes/archive1. Thanks, TBrandley 21:36, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
- Yes of course, I will try and get to it tomorrow. All the best! -- CassiantoTalk 21:54, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments
Hey. Since your comments for that FLC have been fixed, you may like to use the {{resolved comments}} template to cap your comments. Your are allowed at FLC, unlike FAC. Just letting you know. Cheers, TBrandley 01:17, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- Will do. I would like to give it one more read through and give a closing comment before I cap it. Thanks for the advice! -- CassiantoTalk 04:04, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
FLC
Hi, I have seen your work with featured nominations, and was wondering if you could review List of Grey's Anatomy cast members here. Thanks, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 03:03, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Will do. Again, I'm not a technical guru in terms of tables, but I'd be happy to go through the text. Booked in for later today if that's OK. -- CassiantoTalk 03:15, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 15:47, 26 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Before his sad withdrawal, Tim and I were working on The Rite article, with a view to getting it up to scratch in time for the centenary of the premiere on 29 May 2013. I have continued with the project; the article is now at peer review, and I would be very pleased if you can find time to review it. Brianboulton (talk) 18:13, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 21:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 21:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 03:41, 27 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
| This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |