Old messages are at

• User talk:Giano archive 1 (2004)
• User talk:Giano archive 2 (2005)
• User talk:Giano archive 3 (2005)
• User talk:Giano archive 4 (2006)
• User talk:Giano archive 5 (2006)
• User talk:Giano archive 6 (2007)

Is that what you where looking for Tynan Abbey burnt down in early 80s.--padraig3uk 10:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was blown up actually. 1981. It was then demolished (as a ruin) in 1997. Some stonework was saved though. --Counter-revolutionary 10:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see your working on an article on the Lost Houses. Looks good. --Counter-revolutionary 10:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk about fast, thank you that will do brilliantly, profuse thanks - I've just seen a new angle for what could be a dull page. I'm sure though there was a very large neoclassical one too - any ideas what that was called? Giano 10:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There may have been one partly destroyed in the south, I will try and find out for you later.--padraig3uk 10:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Florence Court, which isn't a great house, burnt down - but they restored it. Antrim Castle, which was Massereene and Ferrard's, was burnt by the IRA. There were so many, from south to north. I shall have a look and get back to you. --Counter-revolutionary 10:14, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - they have to ne in the North though to qualify for this page, actuall Tynan does very well as it was attacked in the 1920 as well as 70s. This page though is pure architecture - politics only appear as a background to explain why house were demolished. Giano 10:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean "ne in the North". Yes, Tynan was attacked in the 1920s, there were police stationed at the house as a result. Castlewellan Castle was also damaged by a bomb, as they thought the army were using it. It just took out a rather nice staircase however. Antrim was quite a fine house. --Counter-revolutionary 11:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was also one, I think it was called 'Barnscourt', in Strabane, home of Northern Ireland Senator Barnhill, Blown up by the OIRA in the 70s' the Senator was also killed, that wasn't realy a big house, more a large Georgian mansion.--padraig3uk 10:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you thinking of Drumbanagher, Poyntzpass? It was huge, and in very good order, but the Close's just knocked it down... --Counter-revolutionary 11:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both, they don't have to be huge - just architecturally interesting, country houses, and completely demolished. Barnscourt if Georgian would be great as would Drumbanagher wspecially if its owners just knocked it down, as it show the same thing was happening in Ireland as in England, also it does not make Irish demolitions entirely the fault of The Troubles. I'll see what google does withthose names. Thanks Giano 12:24, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Senator Jack Barnhills house was called Brickfield House see: [1].--padraig3uk 12:49, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aha that I was googling it as we speak and having limited results thanks Giano 12:55, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think you were thinking of the Abercorns at Baronscourt. Drumbanaher was by Playfair (I think) the porte-cochère is still there, and it's about the size of a house itslef. --Counter-revolutionary 13:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I realy want 2 or 3, one destroyed by its owners; one as result of conflict and one other so long as it is interesting - I shall alomost certainly go with Tynan as it is interesting Gothic and attacked twice - then I want a nice example of Irish Georgian of neoclassical and then one other. Research at the moeny is suggesting that Drumbanagher Castle will do as it may have been Neoclassical (looking at Playfairs other works) but i can't find an image yet. Antrim Castle fits the bill but seems to be still standing so is out. Giano 13:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, Antrim's gone. Here it is; [2]. There may be a tower there, but most [all] is gone. Glenarm, where the Earl of Antrim lives - in case that's mixing you up. Also found this book; [3]. I may as well buy a copy, it could help with referencing at some point. I have some photographs of Drumbanagher somewhere. --Counter-revolutionary 13:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better one on Anrtim; [4]. --Counter-revolutionary 13:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure the front looks very much like this [5] if I were paying £540 a night for this, and got there to find the IRA had blown it up, the IRA would regret it, and find they are no match for the Mafioso. 13:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Positive. That's Glenarm Castle, the Earl of Antrim's seat. They are two different places. No idea why they're calling it "Antrim Castle". --Counter-revolutionary 13:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's the Irish they do it deliberatly to confuse - must make it hard though when getting their on sat-nav. Giano 13:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re Drumbanagher Castle it was often referred to as Drumbanagher House[6]- there is a little about the selling of the estate around 1900 at the bottom of this page [7]- the Poyntzpass and District Local History Society may well have photos of it. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A description of it here [8]. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I always knew it as Drumbanagher House, none of this Castle business. I have a quote by the son-in-law of the Close who had it demolished. Say's there was nothing wrong with it, all perfectly fine, but no mortal on earth could upkeep a house of such proportions - now it looks like a nuclear bomb hit it! The family still own the land, as is true of Tyanan Abbey too. --Counter-revolutionary 14:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[9] --Counter-revolutionary 14:42, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that- but no idea whether the photos still exist now.. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From The Times, January 29, 1903: at Drumbanagher, MAXWELL CHARLES CLOSE, D.L., ex- M.P. county Armagh, in his 76th year, of pneumonia following influenza. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His son Major Maxwell A Close married Muriel Albany, daughter of the fifth Earl Castle Stewart. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks all of you, but without a free image it is a no go - I'm only assuing it will be palladian or neoclassical, if not it is back to the drawing board. I need two the Gothic we have (which was bombed) the other must have been destroyed by its owner. Any ideas on one anywhere in UK demolished by German bombing? Giano 14:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was neoclassical. I have photographs, I think, but I'll need to look them out...That could take a while. --Counter-revolutionary 14:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great so long as they were taken 70 odd years ago I think they will be allowed unless you took them yourself! Giano 14:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The ought to be around that age. Why should it matter whether I took them/? The house was demolished around '53 I think. --Counter-revolutionary 14:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think age matters as long as the person who took it or their heir is willing to release it under a free license. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 14:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All to do with the copyright! If CR took them he can release the copyright, otherwise we have to be sure the copyright owner has been dead for x years or his heirs/owners have to release copyrigt into the public domaine, which is complicated and in my experience more trouble than it is worth, as they always want to release just for wikipedia, which is not allowed, then it all become too complicated and stressfull, ss they never undrstand the logic neither do I for that matter, but there we are. Giano 15:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...nor do I! --Counter-revolutionary 16:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think they have to free to use by anyone as Wikipedia content is used on sites that carry adverts (i.e. commercial sites) like Answers.com and if you start making money from stuff that other people own rights to it creates obvious legal entanglements. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 17:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and find out more information about Antrim, I know the old Viscount M&F was there at the time, with his parents; rumour has it they chased the IRA away with shot guns. I presume that saved their lives but not the Castle's. It certainly sounds interesting enough; 1921 I believe. --Counter-revolutionary 20:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Info. on Antrim Castle's history --Counter-revolutionary 20:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Antrim Castle fire. Lord Massereene, his family and a house party were present in Antrim Castle when it was burnt by the IRA in 1922. Many items of great historical importance, most notably the Chair of the Speaker of the Irish House of Commons, which was the centrepiece of a venerable, but highly inflammable, 'Oak Room', were destroyed in the fire. But the presence of mind of Lord Massereene and his staff, and the length of time which it takes for a very large house to be consumed by a fire, saved much that would otherwise have been lost. The daughter of the Archbishop of Armagh, who was staying at the time, was nearly lost, but jumped out of a window. A 900-piece, soft paste, 'Etruscan Honeysuckle' dinner service of Foster provenance was thrown from the drawing-room windows into the Six Mile Eater, but few pieced survived the experience, and then only in a battered state. Much furniture, some of it large, was rescued. More would have been rescued, except that the townspeople of Antrim, who turned out in large numbers to help, thought that the most important thing to be saved was the billiard table. Thirty men laboured successfully to get it out of the castle.

Among the major survivals were the family portraits. A comparison with the portraits itemised by C.H. O'Neill in 1860 and those surviving in family possession today, suggests a rescue operation of almost miraculous success (although it has to be remembered that many portraits and other important pieces were probably in the London town house in 1922, or with the Dowager Lady Massereene at her house in Hampshire). Other major survivals were Anthony and John (Speaker) Foster's important collection of pamphlets, which had been in the Antrim Castle library since at least 1863 (when a library catalogue was printed). The Foster papers, which had probably only recently arrived at Antrim Castle, following the sale of Oriel Temple in 1920, survived because they had been placed in the stable block, not in the Castle itself. This possibly accounts for the much lower survival-rate of the Massereene papers.

The late (13th) Viscount Massereene, who was a small boy at the time, had vivid recollections of the fire. He remembered being trapped with his mother in a light well (from which they narrowly escaped, and being told by her that they were going to die there. Most clearly of all, he remembered the nursery cat with its fur on fire.--Counter-revolutionary 20:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good but the page is purely architectural - no interiors - no memories - I know about the Massereenes, and knew Owl House too for a time, but this page is going to be very factual. Giano 20:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As should all pages on wikipedia! I think Antrim Castle would merit its own article though. --Counter-revolutionary 20:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think all those houses there would and one day hopefully will, I have carefully selected them for notable qualities. Giano 20:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An affair in which you are interested is being discussed here. Bishonen | talk 10:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

• Thanks - I saw. Having seen the standard of wit and comment on David Lauder's page between him and his friends when referring to people they feel oppose their views [10]. I don't think I can be bothered to join the discussion. Fortunately, most people who edit Wikipedia are able to form their own opinions as to whether Doc Glasgow, and I know the difference between a page worth having and one worth deleting. Nothing more to discuss really. This is a modern encyclopedia not the shuttered drawing room, in 1920s Bayswater, of an octogenarian widow of a recently ennobled soap manufacturer - which is what some of the comments I have seen seriously made on Wikipedia in the last 48 hours put me in mind. No doubt we shall soon be warned to look under our beds for Bolsheviks.Giano 12:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...no need to look as far as under the bed. --Counter-revolutionary 13:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I don't think so. Giano 14:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Giano, I see you've been redirecting some articles regarding non-notable people in the Arbuthnot family. Personally, I agree that these are best represented by the single article about the Arbuthnot Baronetcy, but I thought it only fair to advise you that there's been some considerable controversy in the past about whether or not a Baronet is in fact notable simply by virtue of being one. There is a body of discussion on the topic already. I'll dig out the appropriate links if you need me to — but if you've already seen and considered them, then no worries, feel free to just ignore this message :) – Kieran T ^(talk) 16:20, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is fine I think now it is just a matter of being sensible and doing some tidying up, in fact I eas just following some links from some of those pages to the "Arbuthnot extended family" and wondering of we need such pages as this Frederick Gerard Peake at all. Giano 16:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another AFD up here. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 17:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I've seen, can you work out what i have done wrong here [11] why won't Charles Ramsay Arbuthnot display in the lost properly, but appears as a red link at the bottom - foxed me completely! Giano 22:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK - sorted it myself Giano 22:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to say that I'd done it- you need to copy the thing with afd3 on it on the afd box and then paste it at the top. I couldn't believe the thing about the honorary game warden BTW. Curiously he was actually complaining about the elephants being shot, the opposite of what you might expect... Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 22:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not bothered about the elephants, it is a sad fact that every other person was big game hunting there at that time, it was politically and socially acceptable so one can't condemn people for doing it, or not, as the case may be. I have just nominated another for deletion as you know, I see Kittybrewster has been banned for 7 days this time, pity it was not for 7 months as that is how long it will probably take to sort out the mess and conflict he has created. Giano 22:41, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At least in Kenya (and other parts of Arfica) they realise that conservation helps the country- unfortunately the same can't help the tiger in India as I don't imagine many tourists have fun spotting tigers in the forest (and if they do its probably to kill another one). Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 22:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a notice that you are being discussed here. I hope your ears are not burning.--Isotope23 16:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		Your efforts in ridding Wikipedia of vanity articles based on half-truths are much appreciated. One Night In Hackney303 22:54, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, long way to go yet! Giano 22:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on Kittybrewster's talk page, shown here, was unwarranted and unhelpful. There's nothing wrong with a civil content dispute, but referring to another editor's work as "the mess you created" is incivil and contributes nothing to resolving the dispute. I urge you to reconsider making such statements in the future. --Hemlock Martinis 01:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• My edit was factual. I withdraw not one word of it. That an editor can edit the same page (Clan Arbuthnott) 32 times on members of his family and then say "What I think is that there is no such thing as Clan Arbuthnott" when he has already created a further 60 odd stubs which other editors are spending time sorting , expanding, deleting is ridiculous. If he wishes to make edits it would be better if he made them to his pages he which does feel exist - most of which are direly in need of help, rather than to pages which yet again others are going to have to sort out in order to maintain Wikipeda's creditability. At present nominating for deletion is the only way of doing this, where they are either deleted (as many have been - or better still improved [12]). All of this is happening with not one jot of help from him. Consequently, I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion the man is a menace to the project. This is not a vendetta, or a plot by the IRA and the communist party (as his supporters claims) it is an attempt to sort the mess out which is only being hampered by that editer and a very small band of his friends. Now instead of coming here with your complaints I suggest you go and address some of the more serious accusations coming from Kittybrewster's camp. Giano 07:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm not here to discuss your content disagreement, nor whether or not Kittybrewster is a liar, nor your accusations of a cabal. What I am here for is when you call another editor's work "a mess" and then proceed to call that same editor a "menace to the project". That kind of blatant hostility is NOT conducive to content discussions and is never warranted here. Please use a less aggressive tone when talking to other editors. Thank you. --Hemlock Martinis 08:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you go and check some facts. There is no "content disagreement" for there is virtually no content to disagree over. Errors in the work are removed as they are found. I make no accusations that Kittybrewster is a liar - that his work is poorly researched and often erroneous is beyond doubt - that does not make him a liar - unless of course he is deliberately adding rubbish to Wikipedia, which I don't think he is. I make no accusations of cabals either because cabals hold no fear at all for me, in my experience, if one's work is of acceptable standard then no cabal can touch one. In fact Kittybrester's clique is so ignorant of Wikipedia's processes and aims I doubt they re capable of decorating a Christmas tree let alone forming a cabal.

That Kittybrewster's work is a mess is proven by the number of editors currently trying to organize/improve/verify it. There is no "blatant hostility" here merely an attempt to sort things out in a detached and efficient manner, if not agreeing with the "Kitybrewster crowd" is considered hostile, then so be it. Quite frankly, this problem is not helped by comments such as yours by people who only seem to be aware of half the story. If you wish to join or give credence to that rather naive group screaming "terrorists, vendetta, republicans" at those wishing to maintain standards then please do - but please don't bother returning her unless you have something useful or constructive to say in dealing with this matter, as I wish to proceed with something more useful than time-wasting and facetious debate with you. Thank you. Giano 08:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]