User talk:Giano

Old messages are at User talk:Giano archive 1

Please note:-Due to lack of time, I no longer do translations, here or by email.

Palladian architecture

You've done a great job with what was an unpromising stub, unworthy of its subject. I've tweaked to tighten, added a couple of bibliographical notes. What's missing here is the English (and Irish) palladian villa, which I'm working on now. --Wetman 17:52, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I've added some text to Architecture of Ireland which may point towards some additional material on Irish palladianism. Filiocht 10:56, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for yours. I've changed headers in the Irish article. You'd be just the man to write biographies of Francis Johnston and James Gandon. Filiocht 13:49, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

Air? IRC?

Am I on the air? You mean on irc? I just went there to look, but didn't see you.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (Talk)]] 20:16, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

FAC

Check out the FAC page, please excuse my audacity in nominating your article.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (Talk)]] 20:35, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Odd people on my page

What can I say, my acquaintanceship includes sentient life forms from several parts of the galaxy.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (Talk)]] 20:45, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

What on earth is wrong with them?

Yeah!! It's been up there for, like, years, and only one support vote yet, what can be going on?! It's not as if the article would take more than 15—20 seconds to read!--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (Talk)]] 21:59, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Great article and a pleasure to vote for. Filiocht 08:52, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

Richard Cassels

Thanks for the kind words. Always glad to help out a fellow admirer of architecture, historical and modern. I do have some questions about the content in the Richard Cassels article that I hope you can help me out with. Please bear with me...

1. On the last sentence of the last paragraph in the Early work section, it says, "Walls were covered in stucco reliefs, ceilings triumphs of plaster, segmental mouldings, and carvings, in an almost rococo style peculiar to Ireland." I'm unfamiliar with the term ceilings triumphs of plaster – can you please explain or correct this?
2. Legacy to Ireland – This last paragraph appears to be a bit too... literary? It's fine for an essay but doesn't seem appropriate for an encyclopedic entry. Mind if I trim this down?

--Junesix 03:50, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)

Hitler image

Dracula, does you Hero of Socialist Labor gold star look like a photo of Hitler, by any chance? If it does, it's not your page that's been vandalized, it's the image it links to. I have reverted the vandalism of the image. If your page still shows Hitler, click shift + Refresh to clear the cache, and you should (I hope) see the star again. Best, [[User:Bishonen|Bish (Bosh)]] 18:28, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• OK, now try my advice four or five times. Hmmm? Yeah, I knew you'd think I was kidding, but actually, no. I was indignant at the ridiculousness of the proceeding myself, but Carl explained to me that multiple cache-clearing worked and why, I won't burden you with the why (still feeling a little faint after he burdened me with it, the young have no consideration).--[[User:Bishonen|Bish (Bosh)]] 19:32, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

House of Lords

The relationship between the judicial functions of the House of Lords, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights is quite interesting.

On-going British legal cases can be referred to the ECJ for a "preliminary ruling" on the interpretation of any EC law relevant to the case, but the ECJ simply rules on the interpretation of the EC law and leaves the application of that interpretation to the case to the domestic court. (In interpreting EC law, the ECJ also has regard to Convention rights too, where they are relevant.) Barring a few exceptions, such as challenging actions of the European Commission, British citizens can't start cases in the ECJ; in any event, British cases can't be appealed to the ECJ, "in desparation" or otherwise.

EC law could be considered to be a form of "superior law", in the sense that EC law will override incompatible UK law and the ECJ tells us what the EC law means, but only because we accept that that is the case (see below). The effects of the Convention are rather less concrete.

British citizens (subjects, if you prefer) can "in desperation" apply to the ECHR once they have exhausted their domestic legal options, but they can't appeal from a British court to the ECHR. The case in the UK would probably be "person versus person", but the case in the ECHR will be "person versus the UK", arguing that the UK has failed to guarantee the person's Convention rights: the ECHR rules whether the person's rights have been infringed, and, if so, the finding may be sufficient on its own, or the ECHR may order some (usually rather nominal) compensation; the UK considers itself bound in honour to pay any compensation and to deal with legal problem than has caused the infringement, but the ECHR has no real legal ability to enforce its rulings. Following the Human Rights Act, the UK courts can apply the Convention, but they can't overrule UK legislation that contravenes Convention rights: they can only make a declaration of incompatability.

Parliamentary supremacy is a basic tenet of the uncodified British constitution: while Parliament could always repeal the European Communities Act (referring not just the EEC, but the ECSC and Euratom too) and the Human Rights Act, but in the meantime we seem to have elevated European Commmunity law and the European Convention on Human Rights to the position where they are effectively entrenched - the doctrine of implied repeal, for example, doesn't seem to apply.

I agree that many people think that there are European courts that are in some way superior to the House of Lords, but I don't really think that is the case. -- ALoan (Talk) 19:56, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Well, apologies for teaching you to suck eggs :) -- ALoan (Talk) 20:04, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Not offended at all - just somewhat concerned that you may be offended at my puerile analysis. Given your expert knowledge (I am a humble tax lawyer, so what do I know), I suppose you have no inclination to help along the many articles referred to above? -- ALoan (Talk) 20:10, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Well, first of all, it was mostly written by User:Lord Emsworth; but in any event, it is about the House of Lords, not the judicial functions of the House of Lords, so I think we can forgive the article for not discussing the finer points of the relationship of the House of Lords, as a final court of appeal, with the ECJ and ECHR. -- ALoan (Talk) 20:34, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Your very own Nobel Prize

How's this?--[[User:Bishonen|Bish (Bosh)]] 22:17, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Der Führer

You're welcome. - Fredrik | talk 08:30, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Poor old Dracula

Alas for poor old Giano on a zimmer frame, what pathos there is in seeing you dodder on about Reginald Maudling, of all people, while I am at the same time commenting with youthful zest on a music album (just below Reginald Maudlin on WP:FAC)! (Well, admittedly a Beatles album from just about the heyday of Reginald Maudlin, but never mind about that.)--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (Talk)]] 19:43, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Culture of the United Kingdom

I would love to write sections on architecture, on John Vanbrugh etc, but unfortunately I don't feel I know enough about the subject. If you want to insert a section on architecture feel free to do so - the best place for it is directly before "sociological issues", or send me some text and I'll add it; likewise the theatre section is disgracefully short so some stuff there would be good too. You don't have to British to edit the UK collaboration, just interested.

On the subject of the artwork of Hirst or other recent artists I don't know where to find copyright free images, otherwise I'd be happy to insert something inthe art section. I'll peruse around and see what artists I can find and see what fits.

-- Graham ☺ | Talk 20:04, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)