The Wikipedia philosophy can be summed up thusly: "Experts are scum." For some reason people who spend 40 years learning everything they can about, say, the Peloponnesian War -- and indeed, advancing the body of human knowledge -- get all pissy when their contributions are edited away by Randy in Boise who heard somewhere that sword-wielding skeletons were involved. And they get downright irate when asked politely to engage in discourse with Randy until the sword-skeleton theory can be incorporated into the article without passing judgment.

—Lore Sjöberg, from "The Wikipedia FAQK"

This, the funniest thing I have seen on wikipedia, was stolen from DreamGuy

Please note there is now a designated area for complaining about me here (I do check it from time to time). This talk page is now only for important and interesting matters. Giano (talk) 11:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Old messages are at:

• User talk:Giano II/archive 1 (2004)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 2 (2005)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 3 (2005)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 4 (2006)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 5 (2006)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 6 (2007)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 7 (2007)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 8 (2008)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 9 (2008)
• User talk:Giano II/archive 10 (2009)

Essays:

• A few thoughts on writing Featured Articles
• A few thoughts on Wikipedia (unfinished)

Please join the arbitration against me. All negative comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration under my name. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 20:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will beverages and a snack be provided? ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:26, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you are quite capable of making the negative comments all by yourself, Mattisse. Giano (talk) 21:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not capable of understanding. I wish you would comment. I walked into your world of the hated unaware. At that time, I believed in the Wikipedia principles and such and so your reaction was unexpected, as was all the support you received. At least three administrators defended your personal attacks, while acknowledging that they were personal attacks. So obviously, there is a big block of Wikipedia that I fail to grasp. I though it was all about improving articles, and that is not true. So I do not understand and need to "get it". Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 22:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please go away and take your self pity with you. I shall not be commenting on your RFArb because it would bore me. It will proceed very well to a satisfactory conclusion without any help from me. My views concerning you are widely known, and I'm sure someone will quote the diffs if they want them. Now, good evening. Giano (talk) 22:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick note, you're currently being discussed at ANI - I've marked the issue as being resolved at the moment, but I thought I would let you know about the presence of the thread in case you're interested, and in case the resolved tag doesn't stick around. Nick (talk) 21:28, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it be easier to notify Giano when he's not being discussed somewhere? – iridescent 21:30, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You took the words right out of my mouth Iridescent. Congratulations by the way, nice to see another historic building featured. Now, I suppose I had better go and see what they are saying this time. life's never dull is it? Giano (talk) 21:52, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thanks for all your help on that one. Now, I need to hope someone with an interest in stadium design does White Hart Lane, as it's too significant a building to ignore when it comes to any prospective "buildings of the Moselle valley" topic, but I have no interest in Victorian football stadia and no particular desire to learn. – iridescent 11:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well don't look at me mate, the football I could do, the stadia no way. I must have a look at this "buildings of the Moselle valley" topic, either I am missing something or the Moselle valey isn't where I thought it was. Giano (talk) 11:56, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

River Moselle (London). With Bruce Castle and Noel Park out of the way, the only two big ones left are White Hart Lane and the crime against architecture that is Broadwater Farm. (I'm hoping that if I close my eyes long enough, the wretched Lordship Lane article will disappear of its own accord.) – iridescent 12:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see, and there was me thinking not with some justification that that horrible sweet perfumy wine was British, which would explain a lot. The Brits should not be allowed to make wine in the interest of good taste, the only thing on a par with it is Australian Chardonnay. Giano (talk) 12:13, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh, I just looked at Lordship Lane, Haringey! It's...er....very comprehensive, isn't it? Giano (talk) 13:01, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still not as bad as this – the amount of work that must have gone into this pointless exercise still leaves me speechless. – iridescent 13:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well it might be handy, if the satnav goes awry, such as mine did an hour ago coming down the Brompton Road. Giano (talk) 16:01, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I peeked at that ANI report & I'm shocked to learn, that Cate de burgh hasn't been buried yet. GoodDay (talk) 14:30, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then peek again, because she has been buried and is now one if the undead, her incisors are growing and she's looking for you. Giano (talk) 16:01, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

She doesn't scare me at all, I'm indistructable. GoodDay (talk) 18:10, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now you've both got me curious. Who is this mysterious Lady Catherine de Burgh? I believe I once wrote an article on a kinswoman of hers. From which century has she emerged and where does one find her edits at Wikipedia?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to leave well enough alone with the stuff about stress and whatnot, but I figured you could use a posting unrelated to wiki-drama. I gave up (for now) on Chinese character reform. They all learn English in primary school anyway. I started reading about a chap named Ota Benga and created my own space where I could look up Trekkie-like details about his life. Outside that I think I'll start with Ostend Manifesto and work my way up the ladder of article complexity.

And from the category of "I was always curious but never had an occasion to ask": why/when did you go from Giano to Giano II? Recognizance (talk) 23:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw this! Man, Ota Benga would definitely be a better colleague than the flea circus I work with now. Utgard Loki (talk) 17:02, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry you gave up on Chinese character reform, it's a good page, very interesting. Some Chinese clients recently gave me a fountain pen, with what they said was my name engraved on it, but for all I know it could say "Giano is a fuckwit" (an probably does)- I was hoping to decipher it at some stage. Just looked at your new page, have you something against writing about communal garden subjects, like the rest of us? It'll be good.

Regarding the name: It's a long story, in a nutshell, I was blocked for "hate speech" for saying paedophiles should be discouraged from editing. The Admin was immediately desysopped. Some time later, a Bureaucrat decided to re-promote the former Admin. He was once again an admin, I still had guilty of hate speech on my block log. A developer was asked by Arbcom to clean it off the block log. The developer said - No! So I said: "sod that for a game of soldiers" and changed my name leaving the dirty block log behind. Them some time later the developer did wipe "hate speech" off the block log, but I had been Giano II too long to bother to change back by then. It was the first time I was ever blocked, and I have never looked back. If I see something wrong I point it out, which is why there is a block log as long as your arm upon which hundred of little Admins have scrawled their names - most of them have been rightly reverted within minutes. Most of the Admins listed there, I note, usually eventually befall the curse of Giano - one day I must work out some statistics. Giano (talk) 12:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, according to a pen I recently saw, the Chinese think Giano is a fuckwit, whereas they haven't commented on Giano II. Yomangani^talk 12:19, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very wise of them. Giano (talk) 12:43, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think part of the obscurity in my choice of topic comes from your and another essay that basically said choose something obscure and it will prolong your wiki-life. But it's mainly because if I'm going to spend hours on end and not get paid for it then it had better be something interesting where I'll learn something I didn't know before. Interesting story - more evidence that I should have run away rather than consult you in the first place. Recognizance (talk) 14:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, have no fear, the curse is only enacted if you put your name on my blocklog; before he blocked me, Jimbo had long luxurient curls. Giano (talk) 16:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually becoming associated with you that I'm afraid of, not you per se. But sarcasm aside, if there's ever a "garden" topic you want to collaborate on, I'm open to it. Recognizance (talk) 23:50, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With such a charming offer, how could Giano resist entering into many collaborations on obscure subjects about which Recognizance doesn't know but would be ready to learn something.--Wetman (talk) 00:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, that was Giano's original point - it doesn't have to be obscure for me to learn something. At least now I know what that Ota Benga-size drinking fountain is for. Recognizance (talk) 01:25, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As in, you can have any colour you want, so long as it's white....an ode to Henry Ford and Vita Sackville-West :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:31, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well funnily enough, No, I don't really do historic gardens. My perfect garden would be lots of running water with rocks, rhododendron, azaelia and the odd strange temples poking out, all beautifully conrtived to look as natural as possible, sort of Stourhead meets Tibet in the Monte Cimini. Giano (talk) 08:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My only requirements are that the front be separate from the back, where you can arise from a paved place in sun or shade and travel to an unexpected place, then come back by a different route.--Wetman (talk) 15:25, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad I decided to drop you a line. You and your peanut gallery are quite entertaining. If anyone's looking for a slice-of-life topic, I just discovered drinking fountain has never had its own article. I'm sure there has to be some sort of story to tell there. Recognizance (talk) 21:21, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think fountain could do with improvement first; I'm glad the Trevi Fountain at least had a mention, albeit as an afterthought, and where is Versailles and I would have thought the Angels and Demons' fans would have put in a mention of the Piazza Navona. No, it seems Cudahy Gardens in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, are far more suited for the lead. I say nothing. Fortunately for Milwaukee, I am not in an editing mood of late. Giano (talk) 21:59, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. rootology (C)(T) 04:43, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice idea, it could work, with a great deal of praying and good will. I have replied in full here [1]. Giano (talk) 08:52, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know you told me to stay away from here, but I do want to apologise, and I want to do it without the chance that I might only be doing it for personal gain. I don't intend to run for RfA again (I have been mulling it over, and might, but it certainly won't be soon if such a thing occurs), so that is out of the picture. I did intend to email you, but it seems that you have it disabled.

I am sorry for what I implied and otherwise stated about you on the blog. It was wrong of me to post such utterly defamatory comments over an editor which I evidentially knew so little about. I wrote those comments in ignorance, mostly of your excellent work in content creation, but also in ignorance of your good interactions with the community -- unlike I suggested, the number of entries in your block log certainly does not correlate with your demeanour (which, after reading through a good few pages of your archives, seems to be rather good). I did not think. That is not an excuse, not a justification, and certainly not a reason, but it is what caused it. I was stupid in making the comments in such a prominent place, I was stupid even thinking of making such comments anywhere, and I was stupid to believe the comments to be appropriate in any way, shape, or form.

I am sorry that you thought I lied about talking to you about this earlier. I had thought that I had talked to you about this back in March, but that appears to have not been the case. Again, not an excuse, but I have a memory disorder that sometimes leaves me muddled with my memory, sometimes to the point where I remember events that never happened, and don't even remember recent events upon triggers. It was clear that it had not been on-Wiki (because I did check my contributions from around the time that I believed that we had discussed the issue), and I'm not sure where I thought it had been, and now my memory of that is practically gone, so I guess it never occurred. I will mail the Telegraph later to have the offending comments removed, hopefully in light of the nature of my comments they will oblige.

I don't want there to be bad blood between us. I'd really like to put this behind us and get along. What I wrote there is certainly not what I think about you now, and I don't even think it was what I thought about you then, to be honest. I like you, both as an editor and as a person.

If you want to continue this discussion in private, feel free to mail me at neuro.wikipediagmail.com, or just drop me a message back either here or at my talk.

Thanks for your time reading through this wall of TLDR. :) — neuro^(talk) 00:23, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]