Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:17, 16 August 2014

Coat of Many Colours was away on vacation from 4 August 2014 to 15 September 2014 and may not have responded swiftly to queries. In all likelihood the user will be unable to log into the user's Talk page or respond to email.

	Big Daddy is Watching You
	Trolls and drama royals thrown over bridges here

	This user has been tragically disappointed in wiki-love. Once bitten twice shy. Please respect the user's pain.
	Email the user if you would like some suggestions for some discrete surrogate wiki-loving (phwaaw).

Archives (index)

1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

.

I like that picture and I don't like what you are doing on that nomination. Please stop. Hafspajen (talk) 19:12, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

You just won't see the point. But right, there's no point in continuing to interact over it. If I see nominations like this I will oppose citing inauthenticity as reason and shan't otherwise comment unless provoked to. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 20:15, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I am trying to explain things too, and you won't see the point - my point either. Nobody is provoking you. You may win the war, but might loose something else. Hafspajen (talk) 17:03, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

I have nothing to loose but my genius (would that it could have been my virginity a great deal more)... you must know that you have overstayed your welcome here by now. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 05:31, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

I see you have replaced your kisses. Thank you, and now go away and don't bother me again. I'm not long for this world and I want to pick and choose who I spend my remaining time with. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 02:23, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/File:Magdalene College Dining Hall, Cambridge, UK - Diliff.jpg

I've edited out the lens flares. See if you think it's good enough. I have a PNG version so can go back if I miss anything. Adam Cuerden 18:16, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Looked good to me. I changed my vote to Support either, Alt preferred. It's one of those flaws frankly I wouldn't have noiuced, but once noticed it does irritate and best edited out I think. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 23:16, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Portrait of Doña Isabel de Requesens y Enriquez de Cardona-Anglesola may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• di Psiche'' at the ] in Rome.<ref name=Brown/> Her loose hair, the red garments (the colour of love for ], and her meeting the viewer's gaze are all sensuous details;

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Cheers BB. Fixed. I love you very deeply, by the way. I just wanted to let you know that. Let it not be said that I am untouched by warmer sentiments. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 13:07, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

NPA

Coat of Many Colours, "Talk page badge collectors" is kind of a shitty thing to say. You're talking about Sagaciousphil (unless I'm reading-impaired), and I consider it a personal attack. I'm not sure what your problems are with these FA nominations, since I don't speak digital/art/whatever language, but I'm sure that there is a better way of addressing it than by making derogatory comments in an FA nomination process, and I encourage you to remove it altogether, or at least strike it through. If you have a problem with a user, solve it elsewhere--there are plenty of acronyms to go around, including WP:DRN, WP:3O, WP:ANI, WP:RFC/U--or Misplaced Pages talk:Featured picture candidates. I'm going to ping Johnbod here, not because they have an admin badge (they don't) but because they know art, articles, and Misplaced Pages: John, is this going too far? Is this kind of commentary acceptable in a FP nomination? Thank you. Drmies (talk) 18:12, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Certainly didn't mean it as a personal attack. Happy to delete it. Wasn't having a go at the editor you mention. I noticed earlier that he was editing at my Little Girl in a Blue Armchair start, tidying up the citations and was grateful for that and thanked him. That was in the early days in my account when I had taken on a citation model I struggled a bit with and never really got to grips with. I can't frankly understand why you are so invested here. I don't have a problem with these FA nominations, and especially the "own work" ones which I generally support warmly. As far as I can recall I've only actually opposed one (and of course I raised Cain about Olympia which brought me to FPC in the first place to see what was going on). I would like to debate the criteria for a Featured Picture of a painting now that there are so many candidates, now that there are literally tens of thousands of high resolution images available. Really just "like what I see so much I've put it on my User page"? That's the point I was making. However, obviously if I can't be heard in the group I'll go away. I've told you that already.

I know of Johnbod only tangentially because of a remark I saw he once made about Google Art Project pics as not necessarily the best choice, which I do agree with. They're quite often rather poor. Back in the old country for the Zurich games at the moment. Off again after the weekend, so any input from Johnbod he wants me to respond to quickly should be soon. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 20:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

@Drmies:I have reworded my remark per your suggestion . I was in fact responding to Adam Cuerden who has posted once in a friendly and constructive way on this page and whose excellent restorations I invariably support. I was pointing out in the first place that the NGA high resolution pics he has been championing recently are not especially new and then just chattily banging on about criteria again. Perhaps you could let me know if you are satisfied with my explanation. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 20:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

The comment was rather too harsh, but I do question the point of going through the FP process for all these "official" hi-res painting images, at least without seeing the original at the same time. And what was a Yorck Project pic doing on the nom? They are invariably terrible. Johnbod (talk) 21:05, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, and that's right about Yorck Project (though funnily enough I saw one recently I liked, can't remember where). They've served their time. I frankly don't understand FPC when it comes to paintings. A very few perhaps which sets new benchmarks for reproductions. "Own work" a quite different proposition. When I return I shall probably ignore FPC for works of art, unless they're genuinely innovative (or conversely definitely yorckish), but I do mean to continue supporting own work. Thank you for your time. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:15, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

• I only saw this because I was pinged - I've certainly learnt that (a) personal attacks are obviously considered acceptable - the change from being accused of being a "talk page badge collector" to being referred to as someone who just "like what I see so much I've put it on my User page" is equally insulting and derogatory; and (b) I've also learnt that my attempts at nominating FPCs are derided as questionable/stupid as I'm obviously such an idiot I include a Yorck image as an FPC. No worries, I won't bother in future. SagaciousPhil - Chat 21:33, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

@Sagaciousphil: I'm truly sorry to find your name implicated in all this drama. Believe me that wasn't a remark directed at you. I'm also rather drunk and better off in bed than my Talk page right now. Truly I'm sorry. It was not all my intention. I'll add when sober. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:48, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, I haven't had a beer yet and I may skip tonight. I am a bit puzzled as to how this wasn't directed at the nominator. I mean, I'm glad you removed it, but its smell still lingers. Well, I hope tomorrow is a new day. I think daylight will be good, esp. daylight between you and a few other editors. Which reminds me: please don't bring Hafspajen's name up again. They are no longer here and it has something to do with you. Sagaciousphil, I think it was Adam who got the Yorck ball rolling; Johnbod just kicked it a little further. He speaks bluntly but I am sure he meant no disrespect. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 02:25, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I had a skinful. I have to say all this is not much clearer to me in the cold light of day. My comments were not directed at the nominator (I was directly addressing another editor whose efforts I have a lot of respect for), nor "at" anyone for that matter. You can have shitty and smelly. He who smelt it dealt it, Confucius say. As for the editor you mention, the last I heard was from you when you asked me simply to ignore his (her) edits and I said indeed that's exactly what I proposed to do. You might have noticed I'm not even prepared to mention him by name, so I'm at a loss to understand your "again". At my advanced situation in life you get like that; I mean you do learn to send back post surplus to requirement, does one not? Coat of Many Colours (talk) 04:33, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Off on my travels again, and this time I shall be away some weeks. Regarding this latest unsolicited drama, I'm sorry if I ruffled feathers. That was entirely not the intent. I would say there is some understandable sensitivity at FP regarding exactly what the game plan is for works of art. It seems to me exactly as I say: there are now tens of thousands of high res images out there, all of them eligible. It's become a somewhat pointless in-house game. Thus presently we have a somewhat minor Gainsborough portrait attracting enthusiastic support on the basis of it being a NGA high res image newly discovered by that community. Yet when I nominate a much more noteworthy painting by Mary Cassatt uploaded by me last year from the same NGA source, it is ignored.

When I return, I propose to continue monitoring FP for debacles such as Olympia. I shall also champion the occasional meritorious "own work" nomination by outsiders, who I've noticed generally don't receive a very attentive scrutiny.

Regarding the administrator dramatising his infernal mentee here, the 'something' I had to do with the mentee's current by me unlamented absence is simply that I opposed (I believe my only opposition at that forum) one of his (her) nominations. The image was hideous and it turned out that even the provenance of the painting had been poorly researched - that lingers on in the Talk pages of Portrait of Doña Isabel de Requesens y Enriquez de Cardona-Anglesola. But what seems to have really piqued him was the rejection of his nomination by the forum's closer (who came up for RfA shortly after as it happens, supported by me but not our mentoring admin I noticed). I might have some sympathy for the mentee's plight were it not for his ingratiating himself on this Talk page in the apparent belief that I am a sock-puppet he was formerly matey with, his threat to out me, his subsequent disruptive canvassing, and a disgraceful personal attack on the admin's Talk page when I ventured to chill the dispute. Looking though his contributions I see a history of disruptive canvassing, a previous four year absence and a new identity. Needless to say I am unmoved.

I don't believe I can be getting on with stinky seconds all this when I return. I'm here until tomorrow evening should fellow devotees of the theatrical arts feel the need to respond. So long as it's not too entirely absurd you are welcome to have the last word on me. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 08:17, 16 August 2014 (UTC)