User talk:Wetman/archive3Mar2004

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

World's Columbian Exposition[edit]

I was wondering where you read or heard that the World's Columbian Exposition appeared in the Wizard of Oz as the Emerald City. User:Dinopup

Sensible and charming[edit]

Nice edits to Fictionary. It's much smoother now. I'd been considering revisiting the page and adding a strategy section, but your work's great. Scarequotes 18:00, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)

If I could get people to play Fictionary with me, I wouldn't have to hang out here at Wikipedia! Wetman 18:03, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

You did a great job adding to the Harlem history article. I had written most of the history sections before you. Do you think you could provide a few pictures of Harlem? User:Dinopup 10.49 EDT

Thanks! It's always easier to add to your material than to break fresh ground, eh! I tried linking it up at the History of New York too. Alas I have no source for pix. Wetman 05:08, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

At Boboli Gardens your change obscures the fact that Michelangelo's Slaves were originally meant for the tomb of Julius II. Perhaps you'd look into it and revert or edit, if you like. Wetman 07:21, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Thanks. Done. I misunderstood what that phrase was referring to.Kent Wang 07:49, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on Accademia dei Lincei--I don't speak Italian and would probably have been reduced to trying to make sense of a Google translation based on my knowledge of Spanish.Vicki Rosenzweig

Just a note to say that I appreciate --- and enjoyed reading --- your additions to Seven Sleepers -- Smerdis of Tlön

Hey-- great work on New York, New York. Just the right touch. JDG 02:44, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Born and bred in this Briarpatch, B'rer JDG! Wetman

Golly gosh thank U Wetman for T.B. Lib.(i.e. Library of Sir Thomas Browne, perhaps the most influential collection of texts in the English 17th century, ed. Wetman) commentNorwikian 11:22, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)

excellent addition re White Hart- should have added that myself! kevin Kpflude

Good additions on Roy Moore. Thanks. orthogonal 23:25, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

(details, dates and quotes. the more the mo' better, IMHO! ed. Wetman)

Wetman's errors[edit]

Hey, Wetman, when you add comments to the Talk: pages, could you kindly add your name at the name so people have an identity to go with the opinion? (Adding three or four tildes -- the character that looks like this ~ -- will do the trick.) Like you, I'm puzzling over the article Sea Peoples, & when I read your opinions in the Talk: section (which I agree with for the most part), your anonymity weakened your argument. -- llywrch 01:34, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

(Thank you Llywrch, I'm still a newbie here. User:Wetman)

Hi. Please note that I've deleted your posting at Renaissance Fayres and listed it on Wikipedia:Possible copyright infringements. Wikipedia has a very strong policy on not copying information from other sites without those sites' owners' explicit approval to release the information to GFDL. Besides, the title is not correct by Wikipedia standards. At best, it could be at Renaissance Faire, although Renaissance Fair would probably be a better title. Don't use plural titles unless there is no alternative. RickK 03:34, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)

(red face ed. Wetman)

I watch Wesley's user page, and noticed that you added to the bottom of that page instead of his Talk. Just a heads-up. Mkmcconn 03:44, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Oop! As you can see from the heading, I still confuse User:Wetman with Talk:Wetman. Now that I see my mistake, i realize how nice it is to describe youself on a User: page and not have it all cluttered with Talk: Wetman 04:09, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

(I've just now learned how to sign with tildes....)

Just wondering why you started a new article about Prospect Park in Brooklyn and did not merge it with Prospect Park as you are aware that there is a Prospect park article. You can move this information into the talk page of the older article and then try to merge the two. Really since everything is in new article is written by you this is the best way to make sure it gets attributed into the second article, if someone else does that your "trail" on the history page will become very hard to trace and you will loose your rights under the GFDL. Before I start a new article I try to look around in a subject area and see what is written, otherwise a lot of duplication might occur here, making a lot of busy work for people who could be doing other things. Just a suggestion. — Alex756

Well I'm aware now, at any rate. I'm surprised this hasn't happened oftener... Wetman 07:20, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Is "they send me Harvard Magazine..." supposed to be a subtle way to tell us you went to Harvard? If so, it would be a lot less pretentious and less coy to just say directly that you went to Harvard. Moncrief 10:15, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)

(Yes I did go to Harvard, but I sure removed that reference quickly! It was coy, though not technically pretentious. Wikipedians are defined by what they contribute to Wikipedia— and their manners here.)

Sea of Japan/Gulf of Corea Teapot[edit]

Hey, Wetman: Cute comment on Dispute over the name Sea of Japan. The issue may seem trivial or even ridiculous to you, but it is a highly emotional and divisive issue right now among many Koreans and Japanese. The debate has spilled over into English because English is the lingua franca of the modern world. Don't trivialize something for others simply because you personally don't care about it. --Sewing 17:46, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

(How much 'spillover' has there been, if the President of the United States would not be able to identify this body of water with his finger if you handed him a globe! My deadpan comments were perfectly NPOV, which gave them an ironic tone within this highly-charged context. The competing Korean-language names for this sea are not even mentioned in the entry-- significantly.) Wetman.
The Korean-language names were not mentioned, but nor was the Japanese-language name. I have since added the Japanese- and Korean-language names. Anyhow, I didn't say your comments were POV (at least, not from a Japanese or Korean perspective): my reply to you said it's a divisive issue among Koreans and Japanese, and it is.
Anyhow, you appear to be working on the assumption that Wikipedia is for an exclusively American audience. Sure, from an American (or North American--I'm Canadian) point of view, the whole controversy probably seems like a joke. However, if you cared to look, you would discover that there a large number of contributors from around the world editing Wikipedia every day, and there are all sorts of obscure European (for example) political disputes that I personally could hardly care less about, but they are important to someone. I'm sorry, but the rest of the world does not filter reality through your personal cheeky perspective. --Sewing 18:53, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Mine is not an American POV-- I'm a New Yorker! My assumption is simply that Wikipedia is an English-language encyclopedia. I certainly did not mean to intrude wit into this entry. At any rate, to judge from the antique maps being brought out as evidence, we should be calling it The Gulf of Corea, but I shall keep my unwelcome spoon out of this teapot.Wetman
Sorry, third edit of the text below, but here's my final reply (finally):
Well, I'm sorry for my rather vehement reaction. And wit is, normally...welcome. (I contributed the "Able was I ere I saw Elba" palindrome to the Napoleon and Elba pages, for example.) My nerves are raw because of a low-simmer coulda-sorta-be-an-edit war going on right now between myself and another editor. This morning's heavy-handed edits on the Dispute over the name Sea of Japan page were an attempt at keeping things straight...but that may only be my own POV, with which the other editor might quite likely disagree! If I could step back from the debate and ignore my own personal (pro-Korean) biases, I too would find the whole fiasco amusing. Anyhow, "Gulf of Corea" is fine with me. --Sewing 22:05, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

List of famous operas[edit]

Hi Wetman,

Thanks very much for adding the information on Metastasio to Opera seria.

I have question for you: Last week, you added a link standard operatic repertoire to a stub I created for La Sonnambula. I thought this was an excellent idea and I did likewise in several other articles. However, I have one reservation, and that is that that list contains not only operas in the current repertoire but also several "historically signficant operas", such as Peri's Euridice which are not, and hence the link isn't entirely accurate.

Last week I left a comment on Talk:List_of_famous_operas about carefully refedining its inclusion criteria but there has been no response. Indeed, I take to heart your comment that "skirmishing about any accepted canon tends to be most intense around the periphery" and don't want to turn this into a long drawn-out debate.

If you would care to express an opinion there one way or another I'd be most interested. -- Viajero 10:33, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I didn't want to finetune the list myself, hoping people like you would move in, Viajero! I'd certainly drop Leoncavallo's La bohème which was already on the list. What about Philip Glass? Hmm. I think the best question is, are there any classics of the repertory and opera history that aren't included? It's quite a focussed kind of list. I agree with you about lists in general. They must be either perfectly complete or highly condensed. Anything else is useless. Wetman

Biology disclaimer[edit]

Hi. Are you a biologist yourself? The only reason I created a temp article was because this isn't my field and I can't be certain I'm not completely mistaken, but if a biologist agreed it was correct I would just make the change now... Evercat 23:51, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

No, Evercat, I just enjoy Mayr and Wilson and Gould and Scientific American and such. Wait for the biologists. But I know enough to see that you're basically correct at Chimera. Wetman.

Concerning Tiresome Behavior[edit]

Thanks for the compliment about my edit to Kassites - although I didn't consider it anything more than a quick tidying up. BTW, would you be interested in weighing in on the current discussion at Talk:Sea Peoples? -- llywrch 20:34, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I saw your article, New Age Ancient Near East Chronology. While I think it's a good start, unfortunately calling anything "New Age" gives it a pejorative connotation -- perhaps alternative Ancient Near East Chronology? (I remember decades ago, when Powell's Books had a section labelled Speculative History, so thee are worse choices.) And I'm not too keen on the LRH link: Hubbard's view of History is not only eccentric, but not much quoted outside of his circle of devoted followers. -- llywrch 04:34, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Pejorative enough in my end of the library, but I didn't think it sounded pejorative to them! "Alternative" eh. Better than "Post-literate." Sometimes encouraging an entry for Astral projection can get you enough peace and quiet to be able to work more sensibly on Parasailing! Wetman 07:18, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I'll have to remember that trick ;-). However, I have found one of David Rohl's books in which, despite my reservations, he justmight have a point. (I find it curious that the current revision of his Wikipedia article downplays his academic credentials.) Either I'll be writing a little more kindly about his assertions about Egyptian chronology, or have a better understanding of the reasons why historians date events of Ancient Egypt to certain years.

Hello, its "poor deluded" "Ibero-Hurrian man" here asking one last time for some sort of ceasefire and increased respect (at least less prejudice) for different views. Zestauferov 10:00, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Zestauferov: "Wanting to understand each other better"[edit]

I really liked your indtroduction and I am writing here because it seems we have occasionally been at opposite sides of an issue. Stoicism, Marcus Aurelius, Humanism, Popes as Princes all sounds right up my street to me. Maybe I should ask you if you are a man of the name (RG) and like cheese? (if you didn't get that I was just checking if we already know each other). I am an ethnic Jew (which is the only kind of Jew from my view) but agnostic and Reconstructionist in many ways but not neurotic about christian, even muslim ideas. I am into Social Soldarity in a political way. I am very worried about people mistaking Phuntites as Canaanites because I know what some politicians want to happen to anyone labelled as Canaanite (Maybe you will understand me now?). For the same reason I don't hide the fact that Hebrew is just a different accent (not even really a dialect) of Canaanite. I became obsessed with agglutinative languages a while back (when I realized Hebrew was probably not what Abraham spoke) which has left a lot of very weird and obscure references floating in my mind. I do have beliefs but since they are relevant to the condition of my psyche I never mean to force them. I love wiki because it is social solidarity in practice as long as we can defeat the inherent negative entropy in any social system. I am not really New-Age, but my philosophy is an inclusive one rather than exclusive. Anyone might have something valuable to offer even if they cannot remember the reference if it is left long enough someone else will come along with the right one and turn a stub sentence into a valuable reference. Thus I never shy away from creating new stubs. Is there a wiki policy against waitin for someone better-read than oneself back-up an obscure reference by leaving it there unattributed for later? Some of the most valuabel info I have has come from people who have filled in holes I created, like the way in which so many of my stubs have grown. It only irritates me when I don't know who to thank for their contributions. The thing I do worry about is making something NPOV so I am greatful for times when you have shown me that some of my writing seems Guru-like instead of making it obvious to the readers where a reference is missing e.g. the atlantis refugees thing under Heber which I have now corrected thanks to your pointing it out. Could you try to be a little less sarcastic though please? :-)Don't be afraid to just edit my writing style for a more NPOV just don't omit things which you personally have never heard of because someone else interested in the area (e.g. are you really interested in Heber?) may have and can make a better article aout of the threads which I have provided. I really want to be your friend because (except for your sarcasm) to me you do seem cool. User:Zestauferov

Thank you, Zestauferov. I am cool, actually, and I try not to let my native irony descend to sarcasm. I like cheese, though I am not RG. As for sides of issues, I try not to forget, even in the least clause of a sentence, that a Wikipedia entry is essentially a report not an essay. Essential. Reports simply report the actual views adopted by professionals within fields. So the relevant references are always right at hand. Or available through . I keep my balance by reporting as carefully as I can things I'm not professionally competent about: Chesapeake Bay impact crater for example. You might find refreshment for your energy by taking something quite simple and setting it in context: History of mayonnaise.
Sometimes nouns (which are by their nature labels) accrete some shameful history. Then people imagine that switching a label will shrug off the history. Like pulling down the tyrant's statue, this is not usually the dispassionate act of an honest reporter. An historian or a linguist is essentially a reporter.
I don't actually know what 'Reconstructionist' implies. Or 'Social Solidarity in a political way.' Sometimes thought can be paralleled by adding '-ism' to nouns and capitalizing them, thus: Capitalizationism. Perhaps 'Jew' is an ethnicity, as "Christian' surely is not. What then is 'Hebrew' I wonder? I understand you won't permit it even to be a dialect, let alone a language... Many such apparent 'issues' however have no objective reality. I regret it if some current politicians are bent on re-shaping 'Canaanite' to their own ends, but that does not affect the authentic meaning of Canaan in the 1st and 2nd millennia BCE. I feel on the whole that entries that have no objective reality always need a limiting clause in the opening, viz: 'In Genesis Lot escapes Sodom...' 'In fiction, Harry Potter...' 'In New Age linguistics...' etc etc Wetman 19:12, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

"Religion thrives on ignorance" (Wetman quote)[edit]

.. Really? It does thrive on me, for sure :) What is there you know that I don't ?
About these poor ignorants feeding those rapacious co- or only anti-"religionists" ?

Ignorance thrives on itself, and on... about anything but religion, dear Wetman !
Ignorance in those Dark Middle Ages built cathedrals, and the savvy, recently post-post-modern men only built collateral damage in their I-know-better overwhelming force approaches. And lies...

Religion only thrives on the bones, blood, and suffering of others!

You know, the others - those ignorant martyrs dear Wetman. We have a church built on every known place where somebody was killed because of being a witness and saying so...

It worked for two thousand years, and for at least two billion people, talking about my own religion. I am proud to be part of them, and denounce myself as an ignorant here, for your reading pleasure : ) But OK, this does not mean religious war anymore (except perhaps if I am not on the side of your own atheistic religion or whatever). Please do not let your passion take you away from the beautiful performance of some good old sarcastic habit. Afterall, we all do believe in some superior intelligence pervading all Universe, don't we ? Except, of course for some parts of New Jersey :)

Got the picture, dear Wetman? We all think we are the best for the rest. It just happens that the rest is not quite the very best part of the mirror. So we'd better be a little worse ourselves for that matter : ) Passionately the same, and yours, irismeister 18:15, 2004 Jan 20 (UTC)

(For a sense of this contributor's obsessions, see Romanian Orthodox Church. Serves me right for making a remark about religionists. See what you get? Wetman 18:41, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC))

Misguided nationalism in operation[edit]

Dear Wetman,

Please, read the explanation in Talk:Ruthenia.



Hallo again,

I will be happy to discus with you the misunderstandings concerning the article: Ruthenia. This is very sensitive area (however quite obvious for Slavonic speakers). I am an publicist, political scientist and historian. History and present reality of Central Europe is in the center of my interest, including all teritories known under name of Ruthenia. Please, belive me: I know what I am writing about.


User:Wetman, I do not understand what are you writing about. You have copied into the article about Ruthenia an article about entirely different subject. To be worse this article didn't match the present day reality at all. Including information from encyclopedia 1911 in this subject is ridiculous. I explained you why. Unfortunatelly I did not receive any answer from you. You did not start any discuss and you began to threaten me. You also removed my corrections without a word of explanation. Your behaviour is rude and I am shocked because of this. I thought that Wikipedia is a tool of serious discuss of adult people. Mayby I am wrong? I am afraid you are the problem user, not me. If you do not stop behave like a child I will report you as a Problem User.



On the page "Ruthenia" there is an article regarding Carpathian Ruthenia as well. That's the third meaning of the name Ruthenia: on the bottom of the page, because the oldest, historical meaning of this word is on the top. Do you intend to move it into the new page? You should decide what you want to do, because the page is getting messy. However according to me it would be a fault. As I have written the term Ruthenia is used to describe a few territories throught the last 1000 years. Remember also that Carpathian Ruthenia is merely an English translation of Kartpatskaya Rus (Ruthenia is translation of the word Rus). And if you write about Europeans remember that eastern frontier of Europe are Ural Mountains in Russia. P.S. I am not an Ukrainian. Especially nationalist.


Carpathian Ruthenia is what we speakers of English here at the English-language Wikipedia mean when we say "Ruthenia." I am moving all the sensible historical information about the tiny, rather insignificant Austro-Hungarian province of Ruthenia to that entry. Then Greater Ruthenia can even extend over the Urals if you wan—, and back to the Ice Age if you say so! Of course you're not Ukrainian: You're "Ruthenian" Now if I were to correct your usage of Ukrainian, you'ld think I was a provincial slob! And you'd be quite right. Wetman 22:54, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)!

Wetman. Your article does not match any basic standards NEIGHTER of Wikipedia NOR any other encyclopedia. There is no sense.

Good habits require not not to edit articles if a user does not have at least basic knowldege of the subject. I don intend to edit articles about nuclear phisics or information technology becouse my knowledge of these subjects is poor. You clearly does not have any knowlege of history of this area language issues. Please. Stop doing mess.

I tried to explain you what is the point, but you appear not to understand my arguments or you just ignore it.

It should be deleted and the link redirected to Ruthenia. Alternatively the article could be replaced by text about Carpathian Ruthenia from Ruthenia page. I suppose other users interested in the subject will agree with me.User:Yeti

(This user has been reported as a Problem User. See report at Wikipedia:Conflicts between users The issues involve Ruthenia and Carpathian Ruthenia. See Page discussions. Wetman 18:56, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)~ )

(During an edit conflict, I mistakenly thought User:Yeti had attempted to delete portions of the above, thus provoking the following response. Though I was mistaken in this one case, deleting material that doesn't suit his agenda is User:Yeti's standard pracrice. So I hope I may be forgiven.) Wetman 18:56, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)

What's wrong with you? I did not delete anything. Check in history of your page. User:Yeti19:32, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Wetman, I haven't been through absolutely all of the history, but it sure looks to me like you are treating User:Yeti as a person who is much harder to work with than he seems, in fact, to be. I suspect that if you would ratchet down your rhetoric toward him in the talk pages, we'd get more done toward actually reaching consensus about the articles. Since it seems possibly relevant here, (1) I am, by ethnicity a very secular Jew and (2) I am saying much the same to him about you. -- Jmabel 01:59, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Various articles[edit]

I've read the link you put about The War of the Pacific. It's is a good résumé but has one wrong information: The Huascar was not sunk. It was captured by Chilean Navy and continued in the War under chilean flag.

The Huascar is today the oldest ship of the Chilean Navy, and is mantained as floating museum in the harbour of Talcahuano. The ship has symbolic relevance to Chilean Navy because there died Arturo Prat, during the battle of Iquique.Also in this ship died peruvian captain Miguel Grau, during the battle of Angamos.

About The other link on the article (I put)i've to admit is less impartial,howewer i added because has pictures of the uniforms and artifacts used in the war.

Hi Wetman, does Vitameatavegamin really have anything to do with Vegemite, aside from a mildly similar name? I don't think it belongs in that article. Tualha 03:10, 25 Dec 2003 (UTC)

You really don't think the tonic 'Vitameatavegamin' was playing on Vegemite?Wetman 05:42, 25 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Can't tell if you're kidding - I'm sure it was based on "vitamins, meat, vegetables and minerals". IIRC she used such verbiage in her spiel (until she got too drunk to say it right ;) Tualha 21:42, 26 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi Wetman. I've previously posted comments about the reasoning for Gondwanaland vs Gondwana under Talk:Gondwanaland, and replied to your recent query now under Talk:Devonian_period Imc 13:24, 30 Dec 2003 (PST)

Hi, I'm wondering where your article on Golden Gate Park came from. It seems like a very complete article to have sprung up in one edit, especially by someone living 3000 miles away. Thanks for any clairity. Gentgeen 08:07, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! Of course I've been there several times over the years, and I read an account years back, being a gardener myself, probably in Horticulture magazine. But I googled all the details, cutting and pasting material into a notepad, revising and recasting as I went. As names turned up, I googled for their biographies. Like all Wikipedia entries, it's just a report. Wetman 20:55, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. good job. You don't mind if I go through and do some minor edits, right? :) Gentgeen 21:13, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
That's what makes Wikipedia better and better Wetman 22:31, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Nice additions to Opera seria! -- Viajero 13:11, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Glad you liked the Les Troyens article! Many of the opera articles are just plot synopses which I find boring, but it is very hard to find this kind historical performance information -- you have to go digging through LP and CD booklets, etc. And alas, not every composer wrote a memoir like Berlioz's :-( I'd like to write up more operas in this way but it is very difficult.
BTW, you are interested in acquariums, no? I just updated Glofish apropos of the GM controversy and added it to the Main page (it is in the news) Perhaps you could take a look at it?... -- Viajero 18:02, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Are you referring to the Phillips-Matz bio? If so that is indeed excellent and should contain loads of good stuff. And probably there is a fair bit of anecdotal stuff floating around on Da Ponte operas. But what also interests me is also the fate of the operas in the subsequent years, after they leave the hands of the composer: why they fall out of the repertoire, changes in tastes, evolution in production values, cuts in the rececitives, transpositions for other voice types, revivals for specific famous singers -- all that kind of stuff. The social history of an opera (without going into the musicological nitty-gritty). I've added little snippets of this kind information to Médée, Giulio Cesare, and La Cenerentola but I am sure that there is lots more out there -- is just very hard to find. For example, I know that Les Troyens was performed in the mid 20th C by Ducret-Thompson and Beecham -- and these would have been for many people the first contact with this work -- but I have no information at all about these performances. I would be very curious to know what the Grove entries for a given work look like; whether they have this kind of info. BTW, I have the idea you live in NY; did you attend the recent production of Les Troyens at the Met? It sounded marvelous. I was just reading the profile of Lorraine Hunt Lieberson in the New Yorker last week. There was also a production of it here in Amsterdam in October but for a variety of complicated reasons I was unable to attend much to my frustration. I guess you are not a big fan of the glofish! -- Viajero 10:50, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Probably the best way to bring junk articles (like that at Tremolo bridge) to the attention of the admins is to mention it at Wikipedia:Cleanup. Salsa Shark 09:59, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I'm still learning to find my way around... Wetman 13:23, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I'm glad to get the attention of another New York City history buff. Thanks for the link off Commissioners' Plan of 1811 Decumanus 05:35, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Please do something about your user page. I mean really! -- Mr-Natural-Health 07:12, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)

(Apparently this contentious user thinks I've added something to his Userpage. For a sample of his style, see Alternative medicine and its history. Not Wikipedia at its best really, and not the kind of thing I get into myself Wetman 07:32, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)

If you are smart enough to figure it out, what makes you think that everybody else is too stupid to figure it out? -- Mr-Natural-Health 16:26, 17 Jan 2004 (UTc)

You have a reply waiting at Talk:Snow White and The Madness of Truth Liftarn

(Ugh! too disgusting.)

  • The important thing methinks is to differentiate organised religion from faith. People seem to have a capacity for sheeplike behaviour that grows exponentially with the size of their crowd. Any collective of humans inevitably descends into politics. Marcus F of Sydney, Australia. 28 Jan 04.

Obsessive compulsive crank answering big Manitou : ) Not in my name ! Not name calling ! Surviving nevertheless : ) Obsessions ? Oh, I'm much worse than that, dear Wetman ! But not in the game of name calling. Thank you for the ad : ) Meet you there if you have some competence in obsessions ! Passionately the same, and yours, irismeister 19:37, 2004 Jan 20 (UTC)

Nice edits to Andres Serrano. Thanks - Jmabel 06:00, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)


What's up with your article Conscientiologicalism? The word gets zero google hits, and the article is an orphan. I'm listing it on vfd, if there's some reason for this article, speak up. -- Wondering simply, -- Infrogmation 23:22, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)

When I saw Conscientiology I just got a fit of the giggles. Oh well. Wetman 00:45, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)


There was obviously some confusion, because I have no idea what you are talking about on my talk, nor on the talk:Willibrord. Jack 21:36, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Later we worked out this snafu, probably caused by me... Check out Willibrord.

Hey, I was just looking the article over again, and I just wanted to say thanks for being so great! We could have easilly had a foolish argument over whatever went wrong (I think we had an edit conflict or some such) but instead we made an article I am particularly proud of. Keep up the great work! Sam Spade 12:30, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your additions to Temple of Hephaestus. The technicalities of architecture aren't my field so I'm pleased that section is now correctly phrased. Adam 23:43, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)

If you care to send me back to Greece I will happily photograph anything you like. Adam 00:10, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Wetman, I think that perhaps wholescale reversion of some of Ibero-Hurrian man's stuff isn't the best way to procede. All the mentions of these peoples from the Bible should perhaps belong in the articles, though segregated into their own sections, like the NT section of Babylon. User Z appears to be trying to integrate biblical mentions with the articles, and there's nothing completely wrong with that except that he's overwriting the mainstream stuff with his syntheses, rather than putting it in its own sections. The Hetto-Iberian stuff, however, needs to go.

You might like to cast your eye over Temple of Olympian Zeus. Adam 10:32, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Regarding Phoenicia: Of course I should. But I don't want to, because:

  1. I feel I don't know enough about the subject to do so.
  2. I don't want to get involved in an edit war.

And yes, I know that my action is basically doing #2. But the page is a mess, is bad, should not be in Wikipedia this way. I guess I wanted to tell that. I don't know what should happen to the page. But I do not feel up to it at the moment. Andre Engels 16:21, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)

(I had suggested that Andre Engles' recent deletion of the entire mess at Phoenicia was throwing out the baby with the bathwater, but that I agreed that the bathwater was so murky, maybe the baby was just a turnip after all... We can't keep all of Wikipedia on an even keel, or we should soon burn out. Now I'm featured as a wicked terrorizer of poor deluded User:Zestauferov. sigh Wetman 16:37, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC))

He thinks you are behind his persecution? I thought he was referring to me for listing his pride & joy Heberites or Eberite article on Wikipedia:Cleanup . . . which apparently led to it being listed at VfD. And now he is upset at my rewrite of David Rohl -- which I feel is more than fair to Rohl. -- llywrch 17:21, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

In fact, cases like this make me feel that I should just have stayed away... My actions don't seem beneficial to Wikipedia, but they do seem harmful to my own psychological health. Andre Engels 16:57, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)


Thanks for all your work on this - it looks much better now. I have added a bit more on its role in the late medieval and early modern period (and therefore reinstated, in modified form, the statement that it is the end of the Christmas/Epiphany season, since this is now I hope justified by evidence). Pity we couldn't have got this one sorted 24 hours earlier really, but here in California it's still Candlemas day, anyway.... anyone seen any Groundhogs? I thought I'd found an origin for that, by the way, in medieval animal weather forecasting, but of course that was Valentine's day not Candlemas. Please tweak further if you've a mind to - I am leaving this now, unless any more neopagan anachronism gets thrown at it. seglea 01:30, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

You guys really rose to the occassion. -- Decumanus 09:40, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Völkerwanderung or Migrations[edit]

About Volkswanderung, either you make it completely concept of Germans from XIX century, that it can be completely without proportions, or if you make it historic concept, then it must describe the whole process of migrations. 300-500 Gots When Logobards came to Italy? For sure later then Slavs settled down in Eastern Europe. 500-700 Slavs and Logobards 800-900 Awars and Hungarians

It is only way, you can describe the whole process. Cautious 10:19, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Ja? So, warum auf Deutsch, denn, im Englischen Wikopedia? So, what does the German term Volkerwanderung connote, then, that its apparent English equivalent "Migrations" does not? That must be the central question, no? Once you've worked it out, that distinction should be in the first paragraph of the entry at Volkerwanderung, with a link to Migrations for the more general meaning, just in the way you use it yourself in your note. (I'm confident that you can achieve this.) For the history of Longobards (actually Langobardi in Latin), there's already a Wikipedia redirect to Lombards, the standard English form. As for earlier? later? The Lombards were pretty well documented by the writer whom we call in English Paul the Deacon: "In 568 they invaded Italy under their king Alboin..." —that comes from Paulus Diaconis. Wetman 16:01, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

In Central Europe we use translated form of Volkerwanderung, that means The Great Wandering of the Nations, in exact English translation. The word refers to the specific migration, that shaped ethnic structure of Europe for 1000 years to come. Migration, refers to generic meaning of migration. Cautious 09:34, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)

The invention of Richard Amerike by a Bristol antiquary named Hudd[edit]

I removed the links you addeed to Richard Amerike because they have nothing to do with him. They vaguely mention Hudd and might be worthy of inclusion on a page about Hudd but not Amerike. Mintguy (T) 10:53, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

(Richard Amerike, found by Bristol antiquarian Hudd in a document concerning a payment to John Cabot, was inflated by amateur historian Hudd into an eponym for new-found America. Amerike is essentially a pseudo-historical invention of Hudd's. The connection is an embarasssment apparently, and needs to be suppressed. Not a problem for me. Wetman 07:16, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC))

AMNH photo[edit]

Wetman, My bad. I checked the page on another computer and saw your change (quick!) but not my picture and panicked. :-\ Go figure. It's fine.

Thanks for the note.


Hi Wetman, about your comment on the Dionysia page...Euripides play Bacchae isn't about the Dionysia festival, but it is about another form of worship of Dionysus (Maenads). Still, that page could mention some of the specific plays performed, especially if there are articles on them. I have a lot of stuff to add to that article, so I'll get to that eventually :) Adam Bishop 15:08, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)


Please start your headers at the == level. It'd be most appreciated in my eternal struggle :) Thanks Dysprosia 09:48, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Oh dear, that shouldn't happen! The = level is h1 for the title, then == is h2, which should be smaller... but thank you for changing :) Dysprosia 10:04, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


The Pelasgians thing is probably the one area of Levzur's editing that makes the least sense - I have also been following him around on Etruscan civilization and Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, who are now also apparently Georgians, but the Pelasgians were pretty clearly not Georgian at all. I have no idea what he's talking about, but at least it hasn't turned into a huge edit war... Adam Bishop 19:20, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


Glad you weren't offended that I'd moved some stuff of yours around - I was going to leave you a message explaining, but I forgot to do so. I felt that several people had been trying to do basically the same thing and the same information was coming through 3 times when it only needed to be put once. For scholarly authenticity, the article really needs some examples of silly speculative material on Nazarenes, but on the other hand there's a limit to the time I think we should put into chasing stupidity... I would also like to render Iesou Nazarene at least the first time in Greek script, but I've never explored how to do that. seglea 19:37, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Yowzers!! Your userpage looks like my office. Good thing these messages can't fall over, or they'd, um, electrocute you. Interesting article on Celtiberians - learn something every day. Denni 04:55, 2004 Feb 17 (UTC)

Style is everything[edit]

Your advice, please. I am wrestling with the proper verb tense to use when referring to living but retired singers. Janet Baker is or was (see the change in the first line in this edit [1] by user Deb). I had the same problem with Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau but I expressed it in a slightly different way. On the one hand, it seems rather morbid to speak of a living person in the past tense; on the other, they really don't perform anymore. Of course, the issue is complicated by the fact that their performances on recordings (albeit dependent on the good graces of EMI etc.) do live on.

Also, in this same edit, Deb linked Dido and Poppaea to the historical figures. My instinct tells me this is incorrect, but that may be partly because of the operatic shorthand as referring to an opera by a role, ie, she sang Violetta at the Met is the equivalent of she sang the role of Violetta in a performance of La Traviata at the Met. I would tend to believe that a link to the historical figure would only be appropriate if was made explicit, ie, She sang Poppaea, an role based on a figure from Roman antiquity, Poppaea Sabina, the second wife of Nero. Any help in sorting out these thorny (!) problems would be most appreciated. -- Viajero 10:08, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Heads Up: Mr Z has listed you on Wikipedia:Conflicts between users -- llywrch

Thanks for the nice comment on User:Benwbrum/Hapiru, Wetman! I'm pleased with the direction that the Habiru article is moving, and hope we end up with a great article. Incidentally, do you think that there's any final resting place for the sources page I'm building linked off the final article? I really don't know what to do with it once I'm done. Benwbrum 01:05, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Wetman, you're not signing your comments on Talk: pages again. Shame on you! ;-) --llywrch 23:25, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your message about Louis Kahn updates - it all looks good to me and I agree it would have been nice to see more of the buildings in the movie. EdH 20:42, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)

Linguistic imperialism[edit]

Good edit, as usual ;) Sam Spade 09:13, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)


Talk:Eleusis Optim 02:57, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Herculaneum fmt[edit]

Oh, you're quite welcome; I stumbled upon it and noticed the images were in a less than orderly state, so I went ahead and fixed it. I also saw your comment in the page history. ;)

Anyway, it's nice to make your acquaintance. I've noticed you've authored some fine articles. Even the behemoth that is Orion. :) Cheers, -- Hadal 07:06, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Brentano source[edit]

The material you placed on Clement Brentano (see here - I moved your text and changed the page into a redirect page), is it your own? If not, what is the source? I am asking this because here someone else included what is for a large part the exact same text, making it highly improbable you both came up with it yourselves. Andre Engels 12:22, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I put it on a page at User talk:Wetman/Brentano. Andre Engels 14:20, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)


"The 2nd Earl Grey was hanging out with his friend, who happened to be a Chinese mandarin, and.... no." Hahaha. :) jengod 08:07, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)


Just so you know -- I forked Medea so that the play could be distinguished from the mythological figure. You just beat me to actually adding some content about the play. :-) -- Walt Pohl 08:28, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Triple Goddess[edit]

Is the triple goddess from Minoan mythology the same as the one from Near Eastern mythology? And if so, are the two the same as the Wiccans' version? Yours, Meelar 22:52, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I'd agree with that about it needing work, anyway. I don't really know much about Wiccanism or much ancient mythology. Maybe the article could lead with "In ancient Minoan and Near Eastern mythology, the Triple Goddess was..."


Um, please look at the Osmunda page again. Osmunda fiber is now mentioned twice on the page. jaknouse 00:35, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Antebellum Article[edit]

I have tweaked and expanded the antebellum article, please review my edit. Hopefully we can reach a NPOV soon. :) -JCarriker 12:16, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)