User talk:Clio the Muse/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 8

Happy Bloomsday

Happy Bloomsday, Clio; hope all is well with you. Deshil Holles Eamus! Antandrus (talk) 02:07, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, of course it is, Antandrus, and I hope you have a happy one, too. Clio the Muse 03:59, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Vanity Fair reply

Did you really mean escutcheon, or perhaps inescutcheon?  --Lambiam^Talk 22:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

In the original arms it was, I believe, the full escutcheon, though it is likely to have been sub-divided subsequently. Clio the Muse 22:48, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Bang!

Thank you for the GREAT reply to my cannon question, Clio the Muse. Are there any decent books that you could recommend on the Hundred Years' War that will give me some general guidance through the whole period? Bryson Bill 18:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Bryson Bill. There are a lot of good books on this subject, both of a specialist and of a general nature, but my personal recommendation for a solid general introduction would be the multi-volume history by Jonathon Sumption. Volume one, Trial by Battle, which deals with the period up to the Battle of Crecy, and volume two, Trial by Fire, which takes the story up to the Black Prince's victory at Najera in 1367, are already published. Volume three is, I think, scheduled for publication later this month. If you are looking for something a little less demanding try A Brief History of the Hundred Years War: the English in France, 1337-1453 by Desmond Seward. Clio the Muse 22:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to interrupt, but Clio, what do you think of Thomas B. Costain's Plantagenet books? His The Last Plantagenets is one of my favorite books, as is The Maginificent Century. Corvus cornix 19:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Never be sorry to interrupt! I have not read any of Costain's books, Corvus cornix, but I will now that you have flagged them up; thanks. Clio the Muse 22:13, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I hereby award you this Barnstar for your outstanding work on the Reference Desks. Corvus cornix 19:21, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Why, thank you, kind sir. I'm honoured. Love Clio the Muse 22:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Politics, etc.

Clio, forgive me for not following your user talk more closely. (I have been distracted by a move and other things.) I was sad to see that you have considered leaving the Reference Desk, but very glad to see that you have not done so yet. Whether you go on in academia or enter the grimier world of politics, I am sure that you will be a stunning success. Incidentally, I have responded to your political musings on my talk page. Marco polo 13:57, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Marco. Clio the Muse 22:34, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Politics‽ I'm delighted! Speaking of Borgocracy, make sure you read about her relationship with conservative politics. ---Sluzzelin talk 19:48, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Whips and cages?! Not for Seven, and certainly not for Clio!!! For once I really do have to say 'what a perv!' Clio the Muse 22:34, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 25 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Das Dritte Reich, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 15:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much for letting me know, Carabinieri. This is my hat-trick! Clio the Muse 22:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

The tone of your original answer is kind of inappropriate for an article, though informative. Mind helping with the cleanup? Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 17:18, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I confess to have had some doubts when moving Clio's reply to mainspace; but since the article concerns a highly subjective book, the tone of the article would never be as objective as that of the article about, say, electron paramagnetic resonance. If Night Gyr feels that he can improve the article, he is welcome. If he does not, we have a system of maintenance tags to make our readers aware of the problem (if there is any). Wikipedia equally appreciates and accommodates editors who prefer to work in mainspace, adminspace, or on reference desk. --Ghirla^-трёп- 21:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest, Night Gyr, I don't think I will. While I am immensely flattered that Ghirla saw fit to use my answer to the Humanities Desk question on Das Dritte Reich as a basis for expanding the single sentence Wikipedia entry on the book, I did not intend this to happen. Quite frankly, I would rather that it was cut back to the original, than become yet another tiresome Wikipedia battle ground. I freely admit that I express myself in a unique manner-challenging and dissecting-,not at all suitable, I suspect, for the kind of 'encyclopedic style' that is favoured here, for which the following example, taken at random from the page on Stalin, my serve;

Stalin gained considerable political power because of his popularity within the Bolshevik party. This took the dying Lenin by surprise, and in his last writings he famously called for the removal of the "rude" Stalin. However, this document was never made public and was only discussed by a few members of the Bolsheviks. If Lenin's last writings had been made public, however, it is very likely that any chance of Stalin becoming leader of the party would have been gone.

Ok, Ok; I admit I am being provocative and disingenuous. The above example is atrocious history and even worse prose. But it is by no means isolated.

I know Das Dritte Reich well, and can quote passages from memory alone. I could, if so minded, write screeds on both the book and its author, Arthur Moeller van den Bruck. I might even become the Wikipedia version of Pierre Menard, Author of The Quixote! But I don't really see the point. If people are unhappy with my analysis they are welcome to read the book for themselves, and try to understand the cultural milieu from which Moeller van den Bruck emerged, which is always, I think, to be preferred.

I am glad, though, that you think the piece informative. I had been considering writing some more original pages, along the lines of my previous contributions to Barbatio and the Ice March. Your intervention here has reminded me that such originality that I have, my idiosyncrasy of style and delivery, is best limited to answering questions on the Humanities Desk, which was always my chief intention. All the best from Clio the Muse 23:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Clio, I think Night Gyr's "intervention" was a way of asking for help with the "cleanup" of a text relying on sources you're familiar with and to which you have access. We are all volunteers, and you can and shall edit as you see fit - your contributions remain very helpful one way or the other. I, for one, appreciate Ghirla being bold and adding your segments to articles, despite their idiosyncratic style and delivery. Don't you agree it's a pity when all this information collects dust lying waste in the archives? There will always be someone coming along and encyclopedifying it, eventually. Please don't see this as a cause for no longer adding valuable historical information to article mainspace! ---Sluzzelin talk 01:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Sluzzelin. As always, I pay close attention to what you have to say. I may add information from time to time, as the occasion demands, and when I feel sufficient motivation. Not just at the moment, though. Clio the Muse 04:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Having lots of experience in mainspace, I advise to ignore Night Gyr's comment. Some of our most prolific and appreciated contributors on art and humanities - Wetman and Giano, for instance - are so easily recognizable that I never have to look at the edit history to know that a page was written by one of them. A priggish editor would say their style does not conform to his ideas of encyclopaedia; but what does he know? It's always better to have idiosyncratic coverage than none. Clio, I wait with impatience for your article about an American conspiracy to kidnap George III. --Ghirla^-трёп- 21:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

For you it is 'cooking'! It should be ready in a day or two, at which time it shall be forwarded with my compliments. Clio the Muse 22:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

In the interests of neutrality perhaps I should add my opinion in Wikipedia's current writing style:

Clio the Muse's Writing Style.

Clio the Muse's writing style is the writing style of Clio the Muse. It has been described as idiosincratic, however, critics contend it is unencyclopedic.

Criticism.

Critics contend that Clio's prose is too good for a wikipedia article, and people might be persuaded by it, which violates WP:NPOV. However, supporters contend that people might actually like reading something well written for a change. However, critics contend that she doesn't include all points of view by using endless sentences starting with however. However critics contend that she should use a thesaurus to find a clever sounding word like contend, then use it all the time. Proponents point out that Clio's work is always well referenced to appropriate academic texts. Critics contend she should use dodgy google references so everyone can see, and being reliable isn't that important.

Clio the Muse's Writing Style in Popular Culture.

Clio the Muse's Writing Style is a title of an episode in an obscure Japanese manga.

Also, Clio the Muse's Writing Style is a character in episode 183dfao83 of a comic book.

Also, Clio's name might possibly reference the car, the renault clio.

Also, Muse's name might possibly reference the ridiculously-accurately-named-music-genre-with-only-one-band-in-it-but-really-woth-arguing-about band Muse.

Trivia

WIKIPEDIA NEEDS PEOPLE WHO CAN WRITE GOOD INTELLIGENT PROSE!

Cyta 08:23, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

p.s. that comment was a general music geek complaint, I actually quite like Muse.Cyta 08:23, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

However, this can be considered encyclopedic, and shall enter the archive of the Muse, and once again cause her to blow her trumpet! However, on the other hand, weighty considerations may lead us to seriously suppose (infinitive form of the verb split)...etc. etc.; ibid,;loc cit; op cit; ad hoc; ad infinitum; dulce et decorum est pro patria mori. Clio the Muse 22:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On June 28, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Salerno Mutiny, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Well done again Clio. Kindly nominated by Ghirla. Keep up the great work.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Blnguyen. Clio the Muse 22:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, there's the answer! Your resistance is futile in the face of wikinetic energy, and your contributions will be re-assimilated. ---Sluzzelin talk 02:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Resistance clearly is futile! Clio the Muse 22:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 28 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dahomey War, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 12:43, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I do now! My thanks, Yomangani. Clio the Muse 22:29, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Egyptian Revolution

Regarding your query whether you could change the title on the Ref Desk [1], you may want to check out WP:MOVE. You just press the "move" tab on the top of the page, fill out the page, and then it will move the page with its history. bibliomaniac15 ^{BUY NOW!} 22:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Bibliomaniac. Do you think it would be alright for me to go ahead? I have no wish to start a virtual war! Clio the Muse 22:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you might want to discuss it on the talk page first. bibliomaniac15 ^{BUY NOW!} 22:59, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I will. Clio the Muse 23:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Great Work

		The Half Barnstar
		I hereby award you the Half Barnstar, for your superb work with Ghirla in generating encyclopaedic content from the Humanities Ref Desk.

Rockpocket 05:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Muchas gracias, caballero! Clio the Muse 05:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

1944 Bomb Plot

Clio, I just wanted you to know how much I enjoyed your brilliant answer to my question on the 1944 Bomb Plot. The quote in question came from an article published by the Scotsman newspaper in Edinburgh. I wrote a letter of objection, but they never published it. Some of the points you have made are truly devastating, and I think a letter from you would almost certainly appeared. Very best wishes from a true admirer. Captainhardy 14:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, thank you, Captain, my Captain! I'm sorry that your letter was not published-you may have upset the editor! Clio the Muse 22:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi from The Ekh

Hi Clio, thanks indeed for your message. It was very kind indeed, and really cheered me up. Yes, I would be honoured to be your wikifriend :). I know I got a bit muddled up there. I was a bit nutty in high school, and I have the odd flashback when I'm not careful. I'm generally regarded as pretty together these days, but I need to step back from things a bit more.

Thanks for mentioning an interest in my religion. I know you didn't ask for any specifics, but I should point out that the wiki articles are quite good, although the statistical information is unreliable, and there are a small number of opponents of the Faith who will try to mess the pages up (but others watch them closely). I am also always happy to answer any questions if you have any.

So I don't know what more to say. I'm thankful for the way that turned out, though I'll be more arctic in the future (btw I'm trying to get "arctic" meaning "chilled out, relaxed" into the OED, so any help appreciated). Also, by way of changing the subject: I read with interest the discussion about writing style above, where you said "and even worse prose." Is this because, being skilled in the art, you are a harsh critic, or is there anything obviously wrong with it? I have noticed (what look to my untrained eyes like) flashes of Gibbon in your own answers on the ref desk ("From the arsenal of hell came the gun," "If Nazism was a disease, then Ribbentrop was one of its symptoms,") so I'm wondering if you were simply imposing high standards. This is one part of my intellectual side that I'm always keen to work on, so I couldn't resist asking. I would also be curious to know if there are any good books that I could use. I'm looking for something that covers examples of good and bad writing, and dissects them to look at their style. Again, finally, do you know much Latin? If I wrote a book about the 20th century, I would call it "The History of the Decline and Fall of the English Language," and incidentally, it's the same time over which Latin seems to have gone into hiding. I have a friend (I'm trying to recruit him here) who can write well, and he studied Classics and Latin, so it seemed to confirm the direct, causal link. I've started the language myself, though only at a crawl. Well, I got sidetracked, but I really found your reply uplifting. Best wishes, as always, The Mad Echidna 00:15, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm so glad! Please, if you are ever in future unsure of my meaning on any point come here and I will do my best to explain. I do so hate misunderstandings. As far as the use of language is concerned, I read avidly, I have done for as long as I can remember, even before I attended my very first school. My understanding of English is best described as 'intuitive', and there is no language text, as such, that I would recommend. However, what I do recommend, and have done so repeatedly, is George Orwell's brilliant essay Politics and the English Language. I expect you are already familiar with this? If not, you must have a look at it, along with Why I Write, his other major essay on the subject of language. In these he discusses the the very things you are hinting at in the decline of simple English usage. Anyway, as Orwell says, "Good prose is like a windowpane". As far as your own mode of expression is concerned I do not think you have very much to worry about! Yes, I studied Latin for four years in junior school, and can report that that I have forgotten just about all of it! One thing I do remember is a little verse popular with the girls in my class "Latin is a language, as dead as dead can be. It killed the poor old Romans, and now its killing me." Take care. Clio the Muse 01:48, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. I meant to get back sooner, at least to say thanks for the advice. Yes, I've read Politics and the English Language, twice in fact. It's good that you've at last found my level :). I would call it a manifesto more than anything else, but a good one all the same. I've put the link on my user page, along with other language links I'm starting. Even so, I think I'll persevere with the Latin - you may have forgotten yours, but those things always get buried somewhere, and I'm convinced that it helps. I liken those things to the way musicians practice scales: you need to study the technical side of things in fine detail before trying to put it all together. Since Latin forces you to think grammatically, it seems to train those little details somehow.

btw, that stuff on Hume and History was really fascinating. I'm glad Martinben chased you up on it. It's what I always wanted to understand - little connections forming a Hitchcockian puzzle that unites different fields, and strings together some real meaning out of it. I don't know what your real interests are in writing history, but this sort of thing would be something where your background knowledge would give you a clear edge. Also, your intuitions and deductions seem realistic. Ditto for the Gibbon question, which I've just started reading. Also I've finally clicked with who this Ariadne person is. I used to think it was like your middle name or something, and you were just referring to yourself in the 3rd person. Shows my knowledge of mythology and Classics and all that. The Mad Echidna 16:04, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Extra point (July 2 question on ref desk), perhaps you know this anyway and I'm telling you something rather basic, but mathematically speaking, your ancestors would almost certainly have fought alongside (and against) the "real" Edmund Ironside. Also, he himself would be a direct ancestor of almost everyone on the ref desk (though maybe not Ghirla). But maybe that's all old news. The Mad Echidna 16:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for dropping by, Ekh, and thank you for the assurance about Edmund Ironside, though, by that mathematical standard, I suppose it is just as likely that they also fought alongside Cnut! Please, do not let me put you off your Latin studies-I do agree that this is indeed a worthwhile endevour, and I may myself return to it one day. Not just at the moment, though; I have far too many things to do, and trails to pursue.

I'm delighted you enjoyed the Hume discussion. On the question of puzzles, games and interconnections, have you read Labyrinths by Jorge Luis Borges? If not please do, and as soon as possible. I am convinced that Borges will surprise and delight you. It's one of my very favourite books.

History is not just my profession, it's my passion; it always has been. In recent years I have focused on political history, which is where my particular expertise lies, though I like to feed in my wider understanding of literary, philosophical and cultural matters. Can I suggest that now you have found Ariadne that you dig deeper into Greek mythology. You will find so much to interest you. I was a precocious child, reading Robert Graves retelling of The Greek Myths when I was about six or seven years old. I loved the the old gods and heroes, precisely because they were less than perfect.

I see from your user page that you have set yourself the task of reading Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Please do: it's worth it. A plain English version of The Critique of Pure Reason? That would mean reinventing Kant! My very best wishes. Clio the Muse 23:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

....set myself the task of reading the Decline and Fall????? No, I distinctly remember saying "wishful thinking" :). You can't trap me that easily. As for Borges, I have always been interested in him since reading the comment by his friend that he had no other organs, only a brain. Still, it will be a while before I get around to reading him, sometime after Gibbon. My interest in the puzzle side of history still depends on realism. Even so, I have been planning to read Borges somewhere down the line, so I'll try Labyrinths first, when I eventually get around to him. Reinventing Kant? Great idea! I'll have to try it: rewriting The Critique of Pure Reason in the words of G. W. Bush. An interesting one for a political satirist, but I'm not one, so maybe I'll leave it as a suggestion for others.

Looks like your talk page is about to get archived again, so thanks for the tips here. I'll be awol for a while, possibly for quite a few months (work and study). Also, btw, they won't let me delete that other stuff, which is over the top in my opinion (they are obsessive about openness/ freedom of information and that sort of thing, as I've noticed from Jimbo's own user page). This bugs me enough that I'm thinking of going to ground and resurfacing with a new face, really because I think it's my right to be as stubborn as them. I'm sure you'll recognise me.

Shame I can't lure you into writing the sorts of books that I want to read. Oh well. I will conjecture that you may need some extreme challenge at some point, and maybe you'll turn Hume and History/ Gibbon and the Antonines into a book of some sort. Or else I'll track down the one Martinben is working on, though I would have more leads looking for a book by you than him. Maybe he'll tell us more when it's finished. Cheers, The Mad Echidna 01:25, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Dearest Ekh, it's nice to hear from you. You'll love Borges, I know you will. Please do not concern yourself about that other matter; it makes no difference to me if it remains, or is hidden. Besides, I would always wish to know that you are you; so if you do decide to surface in another guise, please give me a clue! Who knows what kind of books I will end up writing; good ones, by any measure; at least that is my hope! I look forward to your return. Very best wishes from Clio the Muse 05:55, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the good wishes. I won't be totally disappearing, but fading away gradually as the semester gets underway, and work starts. The only problem with keeping the current user name is that my friends are thinking of joining as well, and if they read my user talk page, whilst it wouldn't be the end of my world or anything, it wouldn't be fun. That's why I was so blown away by the admins/bosses' refusal to wipe the whole thing. Wikipedia shouldn't be a desperately serious enterprise, it has to aim at being enjoyable. I plan to be eminently recognisable, don't worry about that. I'm the only Baha'i in Perth who likes philosophy in any big way, and there's no (realistic) risk of anyone trying to impersonate me, since I'm not famous or anything (my real name gets about 2 hits on google, so I'm more famous under my username). Remember the story of Sir Gareth of Orkney (I hope I'm not being cryptic here):). Regards, The Mad Echidna 01:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I understand! Do keep in touch. Clio the Muse 02:13, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

German Anti-Nazi Movement

I noticed the item on the 1944 bomb plot and it reminded me of what I read in W. Shirer's classic book on the Third Reich. His description of the activities of the "Anti-Nazi's" make them appear similar to the anti-Roman bunglers in "Life of Brian". Good point about Artur Nebe and the Einsatzgruppe! Retarius 02:56, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Retarius. Yes, a very good analogy! Some in the German resistance did, I admit, act for reasons of principle; others were simple opportunists. In general, I do not believe that they deserve the status of 'secular saints' which they have been accorded, at least by some. Clio the Muse 03:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Edward II

Given the picture of the statue in the article Edward II of England, "weedy" would be an extremely kind adjective for the man. That carving has to have been done after his death, as ordered by an old and powerful enemy. The man looks like the witless prophet played by John Cleese who popped up from time to time in old Monty Python sketches. Bielle 04:51, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Ha! Ha! It certainly looks as if he's having a 'bad hair day' Clio the Muse 04:58, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the sculptor was inspired by Medusa --Dweller 15:36, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

worm head

weed head

Spot the difference:
--Dweller 15:39, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

And the Queen makes obeisance . . .

before the Empress. If you are need of a laugh, I recommend Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language#Semantics, though I suggest you just skim through the purple-tinged prose until you get to the paragraph beginning "Queen Bielle". I asked for the trouble I got, in the sense that I objected to something being said, and wrote so. In that, and in the non-academic level of the topic itself and of the following discussion, our circumstances are nowhere near parallel; however, I did think you might enjoy knowing there is now more than one member of the royal family of putative disgrace. Can we call up a coat of arms now we are two? Bielle 05:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to my court, sister! I admire your courage and your simple determination, Bielle, but, to be quite frank, some dragons are not worth slaying and some battles are not worth fighting. My own task is limited to supplying information where I can, and I avoid the sterile debates on God, the Universe, the Meaning of Life and why is my cat so bad tempered! My guiding principle here is the final proposition in Wittgenstein's wonderful 'Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus'-Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen (Whereof one cannot speak, thereon one must remain silent). Put this another way: I only enter battles I know I can win, and thus lay the Jabberwock low! Fight the good fight, my sister, and fight where it is worth fighting. Clio the Muse 08:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I was trying to cut short the debate, but the very act of so trying merely dragged the process out. Gamma minus on that effort; I do know better. Now my vorpal blade needs sharpening, and it’s all sticky. I am also in for a quite a few practice sessions focussed on developing the exact degree of turning the shoulder required to shun the bandersnatches, frumious and otherwise, before I can re-enter the lists. Heigh ho and away we go, Donkey riding, Donkey riding; Heigh ho and away we go, Riding on a donkey! Bielle 16:04, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Hume and History

You would seem to be my last hope, Clio. Can you PLEASE have a look at the above question on the Humanities Desk? Many thanks Martinben 18:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, you now have my answer to this, Martin, and I hope it helps. You can go ahead now with your question on Gibbon! Clio the Muse 01:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Splendid, as always. I will indeed proceed with my Gibbon question, and look forward to reading your informed contribution. My very best wishes to you, Clio. You really are the Muse of History. Martinben 13:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Splendid! Clio the Muse 22:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Board elections

Hi Clio. While I appreciate your vote of confidence in my technical know-how, I'm afraid I haven't looked very closely at the Board voting system. I suspect that I probably won't be able to get to it in the next few days, so you might be best served to post the question to either the Help Desk or to the Tech section of the Village Pump. Cheers, TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

To my shame, I actually did vote and then reflected that there are no worthy candidates running this time. I would have revoked my votes (if it was possible) after receiving several good-natured letters begging me to vote. I don't appreciate canvassing. --Ghirla^-трёп- 21:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

On reflection, maybe I just won't bother. Clio the Muse 22:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

July 23 revolution

Hi Clio- Thanks for the explanation. I think the name change you and others proposed was perfectly reasonable. I'm actually hoping to create a small article on the 1919 event sometime instead of the small description at Saad Zaghlul, so we can have one page for each. It's nice to meet another Wikipedian knowledgeable of Egyptian history. Cheers, — Zerida 02:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Zerida. I look forward to seeing the page on the events of 1919. Clio the Muse 03:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Suvorov's Italian and Swiss expedition

On 5 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Suvorov's Italian and Swiss expedition, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 17:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

{{citation needed}} tags were added to the two quotes in the article. Do you think you can dig up the specific refs for them? Circeus 20:30, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the news, howcheng! I will have a look at my notes on Suvorov, Circeus, and get back to you as soon as I can. Best wishes to you both from Clio the Muse 22:16, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Circeus 22:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Ghirla has unilaterally removed the tag since (a favorite technique of his). See this diff for the specific requested citations. Circeus 22:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, the antics of the Citation-Hunters are one thing I don't appreciate about Wikipedia these days. For some people Wikipedia is a huge template, a codex of formalities. I guess they are entitled to their opinions which need not be shared by the community. Further discussion on Talk:Suvorov's Italian and Swiss expedition. --Ghirla^-трёп- 23:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I have some sympathy for Ghirla's view, though I will always respond to reasonable requests for further information. Clio the Muse 00:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Information on the source of both quotations can be found on Circeus' Talk Page. Clio the Muse 08:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. I was taking a day off-wiki after this whole debacle. I'm assuming the second Suvorov quote (the one about eagles) is also from Latimer, right? Circeus 16:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Answer supplied. Clio the Muse 22:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Could you add page numbers to the quotes in some spare minute? Thanks :) -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  23:43, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, of course, Piotrus; though, to be frank with you, I am not sure of the technicalities involved in adding citations to an article. Clio the Muse 23:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Stephen Sayre

More fine work, Clio my dear, and I found it very interesting to boot. I tweaked a little here and a little there, but not much. By the way, I'll go ahead and archive your talk page again for you. Rockpocket 04:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and thanks! Where have you been, if you do not mind me asking? I was beginning to worry that you were 'missing in action'! How could I manage without you? Clio the Muse 05:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I have been awol for a while, I'm afraid. We have submitted a paper to Nature and recently got the comments back from peer review. So its been all hands to the deck trying to address their suggestions and get the paper published as quickly as we can. In a week or two, normal service shall be resumed! Rockpocket 07:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Excellent news! Let me know the edition of Nature and the title of the paper. Who knows? I might even read it! Clio the Muse 07:50, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I will do, but publication is not a done deal yet, so don't hold your breath! Rockpocket 17:09, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Mmm....mmmm...Clio the Muse 22:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Brackmann

I expected you would answer this, given your extensive knowledge of inter-war European history. I am so glad I was not disappointed. With much respect from E. G. A.. Husserl 14:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Delighted! Clio the Muse 22:21, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Poland and ref desk

Clio, first let me congratulate you on your outstanding job at the reference desk: I rarely visit it but just from my occasional glimpses of new articles created based on your work, I can only shake my head in admiration. I do have one tiny request: if there is a question - or answer that can be transformed into an article - related to Poland - please let me (or WP:PWNB) know, so we can help with it. Take care, -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  23:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Piotrus, you are very nice! I will indeed alert you to any Poland related issues that may come up. All the very best from Clio the Muse 23:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I spotted it by accident, so your notifications are still very much welcomed! -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  14:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad. Clio the Muse 22:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Purposes of the Ref Desks

"Definitive"? Thanks! (Careful, though, or it'll go to my head...) --Steve Summit (talk) 00:25, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

It certainly summed up how I feel! I am here to supply information, and to enjoy myself in the process. Is there any better motive than that? Good sense, intelligence and wit: these are the qualities that the Reference Desk needs. Clio the Muse 02:04, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Fernando Santos Costa

On 8 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fernando Santos Costa, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 20:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, GeeJo! Clio the Muse 22:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

On 9 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Basque witch trials, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--And another one :) GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 22:20, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Keep 'em coming! Again, my thanks. Clio the Muse 22:39, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Council of Basel

As a historian, what do you thinkl of this council's Wikipedia label? Is this an R.C. thing? --Wetman 04:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Wetman! Council of Basel is right; that's how it is commonly referred to; it's certainly how I would refer to it. Although church councils could, and did, move from place to place, they are generally know by the location to which they were first summoned. The Council of Ferrara-Florence was a continuation of the Council of Basel. Is there something I'm missing here? Clio the Muse 04:53, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Stephen Sayre

On 10 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stephen Sayre, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 10:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

GeeJo, you are becoming such a regular visitor that I've decided to set aside a room for you! Anyway, you are always welcome, and thank you so much for the news. I'm particularly fond of the piece on Sayre. Clio the Muse 22:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Reference Desk Article Collaboration

Hi Clio. I just wanted to inform you that I have been logging the results of your productive RD-to-article partnership with Ghirlandajo at Wikipedia:WikiProject Reference Desk Article Collaboration. The project itself is not overly active at the moment (indeed, you, Ghirlandajo and I appear to be the only people keeping it alive!), but my objective is to have a ongoing record of the tangible, positive effect that RD has had on the whole project. I think it is both informative and important to be able to demonstrate that the RD is more than just a talking shop. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know and to ensure you didn't mind your sterling work being "claimed" by a collective (that essentially consists of you both!) Rockpocket 01:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that news, Rockpocket. Yes, I agree; such collaboration does indeed show the real potential of the Reference Desk. This whole thing is a collective enterprise, so I have no basis for complaint. I also manage to maintain my distinctive voice on the Humanities RD, so I can enjoy the the best of both worlds! Clio the Muse 02:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Rub a dub dub

I always like Adambrowne666's questions. This one was posted at the science desk. I think you can do far better than I did, and request that you dip your toes in the Science tub, for once. :-) ---Sluzzelin talk 06:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, he specified; the question was about medical history and received a good answer. Still might be worth a look! ---Sluzzelin talk 08:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

...three men in a tub! Hi, Sluzz. I really do not think I can improve on the answer that has been given, but thanks for bringing this to my attention. Laudable pus-yuck!!! Clio the Muse 22:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Napoleon on St Helena

Great response on this one! Informative, fun to read, and things I knew nothing about. Just wanted to let you know I enjoyed it! Pfly 04:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm delighted that you found this of some use, Pfly. I appreciate your kindness. Clio the Muse 05:53, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

By the way, reading through your user page, I was struck by several things: "Blessed is he who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed." sounds practically Taoist. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, all six volumes? I have it, but have not been able to get through it all. Somehow I find the The Story of Civilization easier.. "Also Sprach Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche. A book for me and no-one!" ..I must be no-one! My favorite or at least most remember passage is the one about the "azure bell of heaven".. I'd look it up for better cf'ing, but perhaps that is enough to pin it down. "Histories by Herodotus. Where would we be without Herodotus?" ..Indeed! ..unfortunately most of the rest of the works you list I've not read. So many books, so little time. Pfly 07:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, yes, indeed. I have a tendency, Pfly, to have as many as perhaps five books 'on the boil' at the same time, discarding one and turning to the other as the mood takes me; and that's only my leisure reading! At present my chief focus is on the novels of Thackery and the history of post-war Germany. Now, how is that for an unusual combination? Clio the Muse 23:03, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

elvis has left the building

hey up good lady, how are thangs? elvis has left the building and so is perry for about 3/4 weeks: holidays and the pennding birth of perry jr. Just wanted to say that you have rekindled my interest in history, i once was passionate about history due to a very excellent and inspiring teacher at school, alas as i continued, with what the scottish mainstream schooling considered education, my love was cut short by an apallingly crass and insipid new teacher. Granted i've not exactly bought all 6 volumes of the rise and fall... but i am starting to read more history, a small begining, but a good one i feel, and firmly to be laid at your feet (so to speak). Take care and i will post on my return of yet another addition to the mankster tribe, love Perry-mankster 11:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC) [2] ah thank you very much uha X

I'm well, dear Elvis and even dearer Perry! My very best wishes go out to both you and your lovely wife, and I wish you joy on what I feel sure must be one of life's truly great experiences. I will be thinking of you with all of the positive thoughts I can muster.

I'm so glad that I've managed to rekindle your interest in history. It's a fascinating subject, one that I have loved all of my life (well, for as long as I can remember; and that is no exaggeration!) and I consider it to be a terrible pity when people are turned against it, for whatever reason. When you are in a position to think about this again (assuming you are not completely exhausted!) let me know if there is a specific topic you are interested in and I will try to make some reading suggestions. In the meantime...Take my hand, take my whole life too... Love, Anastasia and Clio the Muse 22:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

syntax note

Hey Clio,

I've really been enjoying reading your answers at the Humanities Reference Desk. I am very impressed by your ability to produce on demand such elegantly written, erudite prose to answer questions on a variety of topics. I thought I might give you a quick, timesaving note on syntax. You don't need to pipe links just to italicize them (for example [[[Fear and Trembling|''Fear and Trembling'']] -> Fear and Trembling) you can just put the quote marks outside the square brackets (''[[Fear and Trembling]]'' -> Fear and Trembling) for the same effect. GabrielF 14:09, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your good opinion, Gabriel; but a special thanks on that technical note. I learn all the time! Clio the Muse 22:31, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

July 12th DYK

On 12 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Albert Brackmann, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Andrew c ^[talk] 17:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

My thanks, dear Andrew! Clio the Muse 22:29, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Clio, could you take a look at this edit? --Ghirla^-трёп- 23:59, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Ghirla. I've just checked my sources and can confirm that he was appointed professor of history at Köningsberg in 1913, though clearly not at the age of twenty-seven! He did, however, join the staff of MGH (the major German source publication for medieval documents) at that age, which would, of course be in 1898. The error was due to a misreading on my part. I will make the adjustment, if you wish. Regards Clio the Muse 00:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I've now corrected the page. Clio the Muse 02:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --Ghirla^-трёп- 13:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hegel's order of arts

Hello Dr. A. Regarding Hegel's order of the arts, nothing much pops up on the internet except this on the French wikipedia [3]:

L'époque des Lumières [modifier] Hegel, dans son Esthétique vers 1818-1829, classe les arts selon une double échelle de matérialité décroissante et d'expressivité croissante. Il distingue ainsi six arts, dans cet ordre : architecture sculpture peinture musique danse poésie

Now I would trust true blue you anyday over those damnable frenchies but are you sure about your order vs. this, especially dance? Here in the south pacific we are on holiday, despite it being midwinter, and I am remote from my institution's library. Nothing relevant on german Wikipedia. Regards Mhicaoidh 11:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I thank you for your confidence, Mhicaoidh! It's a while since I read Hegel's lectures, I admit, but I do not remember any specific reference to dance. However, have a look at this [4] from The Journal of Speculative Philosophy. You are in the south Pacific? I am green with envy. From London in the rain I send you my best wishes. Clio the Muse 22:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Well it seems you are (feign surprise!) right again: "Such we may take to be the articulated totality of the particular arts, viz., the external art of architecture, the objective art of sculpture, and the subjective art of painting, music and poetry." Mind you I wouldnt put it pass those dour Marxists to have erased dance.... Green, are you? How nice to hear you have ventured out of the library long enough to get an English tan! Although at least it is summer in London, it is mid winter here, though still pleasent enough to have taken a couple of your rivals from Oxford to the beach to pad the black ironsands and dip their toes in the vast Pacific. Regards Mhicaoidh 06:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

The Anglo-Saxon tan, dear Mhicaoidh, is even paler this year than usual. We are now living, it would seem, through a new phase of weather: the English monsoon! I really should not complain, though. I spent Christmas and New Year in Buenos Aires, and a good bit of last February in Mexico and Guatemala. My next big thing is a safari in east Africa later this year; so that keeps me going through the wet! Watch out for those Oxford bods. Their teeth are sharper than all the sharks in the wide Pacific Ocean! Clio the Muse 22:18, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 13 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ignaz Trebitsch-Lincoln, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 12:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Yomangani, for letting me know. Clio the Muse 22:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Ha-ha! --Ghirla^-трёп- 15:29, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear old Trebitsch: he still manages to perplex! Clio the Muse 22:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

A Bit of Rough?

I can understand that Anastasia might have an interest in a discrete/discreet "bit of rough", but surely Clio's passions are totally subsumed in historical discourse. Down, girl! Bielle 15:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Ha! Ha! Sometimes even Clio has simple human passions which she shares with her earthly sister and companion, in the style of all the Greek deities; and Echo calls Narcissus forever! Clio the Muse 22:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi

I just wanted to tell you I love your contributions to the Humanities reference desk :) Whenever I see your name I read the whole comment, even if it is huge. You were the one who recommended Martin Gilbert's World War II and I'm loving it. However, you also mentioned one book about Operation Barbarossa and another about the Battle of Stalingrad, but I've forgotten the name of the author of those two books. Could you please tell them again? Thank you :) --Taraborn 17:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Taraborn. You have no idea how pleased I am to get your message; it is really good to know when one is appreciated. Anyway, the books you are looking for are Barbarossa; the Russo-German Conflict, 1941-45 by Alan Clark, and Stalingrad by Anthony Beevor. Happy reading and best wishes from Clio the Muse 23:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Fine. Thank you very much again ;) --Taraborn 16:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Delighted! Clio the Muse 23:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Nietzsche

I apologize if you feel insulted by my edit here on the helpdesk. I did not mean to insult you, but merely state an argument. A characterization of Nietzsche as (close to) anarchism (related question: which anarchism?) is as right as his characterization as (close to) National-Socialist. He might have liked freedom too much to be close to National-Socialist, but he disliked equality too much to be close to anarchist. They are both mischaracterizations of his philosophy. C mon 11:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

You have no need to apologise, C mon. I was frustrated rather than annoyed by what I took to be a wilful misinterpretation of my words. I deliberately linked anarchism with libertarianism to make my intention clear, which was, of course, to distance Nietzsche from twentieth century fascism and mass movements of any kind. Nietzsche is about the exeptional, the ability of talented people to transcend the mundane and create their own meanings in the midst of chaos. I love his work. But I confess that you may have caught me on the rebound, so to speak. I was astonished by the muddle-headed ignorance, reflected in the prose, of a prior response to what I wrote, and the parade of of a viewpoint that I believed had all but died away. Clearly not. Clio the Muse 22:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Latin?

I was reading an article in English Historical Review (‘The Death of Edward II in Berkeley Castle’, The English Historical Review, cxx, 489 (2005), pp. 1175-1214. in case you know it) and there were many untranslated latin quotes. This being my first dip into a historical journal I didn't know if latin knowledge was expected, it seemed unusual. And I thought you would be just the person to ask! Cyta 18:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Cyta. It's bad practice, I know, but it can and does happen in some scholarly journals, on the assumption that specialist shall speak unto specialist, and the rest can go to the devil! I wasn't aware that The English Historical Review, which I used extensively during my own research, was a particular offender, but my main period of study is the seventeenth century, by which time Latin had all but disappeared from official documents. Clio the Muse 22:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes I assumed it would be mainly in mediaeval history (and presumably Roman history too!). Well I guessed what it meant from context so no problems. Maybe I'll have a reference desk question soon on Edward II. Thanks for your help. Cyta 07:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome, and bring on your Edward questions, Cyta. No hot poker nonsense, though! Clio the Muse 23:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 18 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thomas Charnock, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 00:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

My thanks for the news, Yomangani! Clio the Muse 00:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Yagoda

This was a recent adition by an anonymous know-it-all. The Library of Congress, from where the image was taken, notes that "the man at right, rear, is unidentified".[5] Thanks for spotting this! --Ghirla^-трёп- 10:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

And thank you for your quick response, Ghirla! Clio the Muse 23:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

"Defeat was born on the inside"

Thats a particularly nice phrase, I can't find it in Bartletts etc, is it yours? Mhicaoidh 11:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Mhicaoidh. It's mine, all mine! Clio the Muse 23:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

You've had some nice pithy fins to your comments lately Mhicaoidh 13:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

You are very kind! Clio the Muse 22:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Well be careful, I might quote you, then I'd have to reference you, and that would involve your secret identity being uncovered, supergirl! Mhicaoidh 05:25, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Up, up and away! Clio the Muse 05:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

You don't have to answer :) --Ghirla^-трёп- 23:47, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me to this, Ghirla: I have no intention of answering! These things have a tendency to turn into old fashioned naval battles, broadside for broadside, and serve no useful purpose. I have noted the-slightly hysterical-response, though, and stand fully by my observations and judgements. You are my Russian comrade, Ghirla, and I rely, as always, on your skill, intelligence and good sense. Clio the Muse 00:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Can you help?

Hello, my wonderful library hanger.

Please see this diff ([6]).

If I'm right, he should show up in some list of commissioned officers somewhere and if I'm wrong, his name must be all over a bunch of war-related indices. Can you help? --Dweller 18:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Dweller. I'm actually down from Cambridge for the summer, so I do not have access to the same level of resources. I have, however, had a look through my father's-very good-library, and can find no mention of Mr. Moses Junior in any recent biographical material. If I come across anything elsewhere I will let you know. However, my personal reaction is that he seems a fairly obscure person, no matter how worthy the life. On this basis, I think I could take any number of obits. from The Times and turn them into Wikipedia pages. One thing puzzles me though, the statement that he was "given the position of Commander of the US throughout the Invasion of Normandy." Does this mean that Roosevelt and Eisenhower were somehow indisposed, allowing Mr. Moses to take up the slack? Now, that really would make him worthy of note! Clio the Muse 23:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Exactly my point. I think a crucial "a" is missing before the word Commander. --Dweller 07:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

As I suspected! Lol. Check the edit I just made to the article. Thanks for trying. --Dweller 07:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Dweller. From commanding the whole of the United States forces in Europe during the Normandy invasion, to commanding a single naval base-what a come down! Clio the Muse 22:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello

you said you're doing a PhD at Cambridge on development of english party politics or something. Did you by any chance do SPS or PPE? Philc 13:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

And hello to you, Philc. I say my research is in seventeenth century English party politics (Whig and Tory) and nothing besides! I am a historian, though I will admit to reading some philosophy and politics as an undergraduate. All the best from Clio the Muse 22:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Ahh, fair enough, it's just that at the end of this summer - but hopefully I can decide sooner - I have to nail myself down to a chosen course, and I just want to pick the right one, and at the moment I can't I'm torn between many of my interests, PPE and SPS two courses I'm considering, so of course if you were enrolled on such courses it could have been useful to chat, but unfortunately history is not one I'm considering. Though I can't even decide to go with science or humanities! Ahwell, hopefully it works out. Philc 00:08, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

SPS and PPE are both good choices, Phil, and I am sure you will decide for the best. It's all to the good; and I wish you every success, however it works out. Clio the Muse 00:51, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

interview

Hi

Im a FRench journalist and I'm loooking for people who write articles for WIkipédia and have high qualifications in history. I would be very interested in asking you a few questions about your motivations and your evalutaion of the average quality of historical articles in wikipédia. Would you agree on that?

You can contact me on (email removed)

Hope to talk to you soon!

Béatrice

Welcome, Béatrice. Yes, I would be pleased to help, and you now have mail! Best wishes from Clio the Muse 22:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't like to mess about with other users' pages. You might want to protect Béatrice, or suggest she protect herself, by removing her email address from your page,. Perhaps you will get there before Google does! Bielle 00:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you are right, Bielle. I completely overlooked this danger. Anyway, for future reference, I trust you to 'mess about' with my page as you wish! Clio the Muse 00:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Polish-French relations

I have incorporated your great reply into the newly created Polish-French relations article. Would, by any chance, you have access to this article?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  22:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I am delighted to have helped you with this, Piotr. I am down from university for the summer (summer, she writes; you should experience the weather here. My father says he is going to build an arc for our family, friends, pets and other assorted livestock!) and I do not, unfortunately, have access to kind of the material you have linked. If you still need it in late September I should be able to help then. Regards Clio the Muse 23:07, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

No hurry. I am writing a hook for DYK, would you agree that in general, Poland and France have never been enemies, and often allies? I am concerned about the Cold War period, and maybe there was some footnote hostility on in medieval era...? -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:10, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I would agree that the two countries have long had a close relationship, in both cultural and political terms: Chopin and George Sand might be the perfect metaphor for this!. I have never come across any reference to French hostility towards Poland, even in the Cold War period. The general feeling in the west at the time was probably more one of sympathy towards the Poles, clearly under the domination of the Soviets. You also have to bear in mind that France, while a member of NATO, was something of a maverick, tending to pursue a quite independent political line; anti-communist, yes, but far more subtle in approach to these matters than, say, the United States. General De Gaulle, for instance, always considered the war in Vietnam to be more about nationalism than communism. The Medieval period? Again I can detect no French hostility towards the Poles. There was no issue over which the two powers were likely to clash. The Poles, moreover, thought well enough of the French in the early modern period to choose one of their kings from among them! Clio the Muse 22:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

		The Epic Barnstar
		Awarded to Clio for outstanding contributions to history of the 17th-19th centuries.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:02, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

On July 25, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Polish-French relations, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:02, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Blnguyen. I'm touched. Clio the Muse 22:01, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Clio the Muse

Thank you again for your highly educated and thoughtful replies to my questions on pre-War British diplomacy. I need this information for a paper I am writing on appeasement. I've now had a quick look at your user page: what an admirable CV you have! My son also went to public school (Eton College), though he seems to have taken far less from the experience than you. Do you also shoot among your other sporting activities? Forgive me for being so nosey; it's my time of life! Anyway, I look forward to reading your future answers on the reference desk, which I only discovered a few days ago. Kind regards S. J. Blair 07:28, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

My thanks for your gracious words, S. J. Blair; they are very much appreciated. Yes, I have been shooting, with my father and brothers on the grouse moors of Scotland, though I would not place this among my favoured sporting activities. Clio the Muse 22:40, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

On the inadequacy of congratulations

I always feel that I'm somehow misusing the word when I congratulate someone for their own hard work. It also feels odd somehow to say "I honor you"- possibly because it implies that I'm in a position to bestow something from above. And to say "you have earned my respect" sounds to imply that you didn't have it before- or that it is something you were working for. And to simply say "good job" is trivializing.

I once wrote a long, long poemesque thing about (a small number of) the inherent impossibilities of completely effective communication. Except, I don't think anyone would actually have guessed that that is what it was about. Anyway, to me (and probably only to me) it was a masterpiece of accomplishment because it managed to defy its own conclusions and reveal something meaningful within the struggle itself. But I didn't care for the feeling of accomplishment so much as what was accomplished. Not just in my opinion, but in my basic thought patterns ever after.

If, perchance, I was in a position to have my opinion matter whatsoever, I would say something a little like this: You really deserve to feel great about yourself and I hope you do. Perhaps, as an added bonus, people that don't know you very well will now have less trouble understanding why they shouldn't bother resisting the impulse to be in awe of you.

And, as I've said before, I hope you live forever and forever, Doctor Anastasia. DeepSkyFrontier 05:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what to say other than I am incredibly moved by your generosity, DeepSkyFrontier, and that is no exaggeration. Clio the Muse 22:07, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

If you're happy, then mission accomplished. Thanks for your graciousness, though it hardly feels like generosity to speak the truth. In any event, you are absolutely welcome. And please do take especially good care of yourself. I'm perfectly serious about wanting you to be around for a few Graham's number's of years. DeepSkyFrontier 06:03, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

A really big smile! Clio the Muse 14:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

wonder woman

Dearest Clio, thank you so much for your answer to my latest question. You are a wonder. SeanScotland 13:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Kindness is never a wonder! Thanks, Sean. Clio the Muse 22:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Dr CT Muse

		The Epic Barnstar
		I see you already have one, but I think your level of work deserves two. Apparently, I am supposed to explain here why I award it, but somehow there are few doubts that wp:rd/h would be why!martianlostinspace 13:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I also see several already on your user page, but that is your personal space, and not for me to trample on, you may move it there if you wish. I only realised recently that you share your middle name with Ivan the Terrible and Winnie the Pooh.martianlostinspace 13:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

You are wonderful, martian, and I thank you! This star will be added to the constellation. Ivan and Winnie? A lovely combination! My true antecedent, though, is a certain Atilla the Hun! Clio the Muse 22:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Clio, I really should say that you have some of the strangest acquaintances that I have ever seen! Atilla? Why, what is is it that so attracts you to the Huns, whose Hunnic Empire I could honestly say I never knew existed (probably typical for most people to not have heart of it before)?martianlostinspace 23:36, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

It was really just the 'the' I was thinking of; but I attack like an intellectual Hun: advancing and retreating, cutting and thrusting, wearing and winning! Clio the Muse 23:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Mark Hucko and Slovio

Hi. Interesting AfD debates going on for both of these related topics. I suspect you're still remote from your framtumptious library, but if you applied your researching skills to Slovio in the first instance, you might turn up some interesting stuff from reliable sources... Pretty please? Lol. --Dweller 13:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Mark who? Not a good start, sorry Dweller. I am indeed still in London, but even a remote catalogue search has thrown up nothing, either by name or by subject. As far as the English language is concerned this man simply does not exist. To be more precise, he has not published, which amounts to the same thing. This seems odd if he really is a noted linguist. He appears on google, but I'm sure you are aware of that, though a lot of the pages seem self-referential. I do not wish to be unkind-and I admit that linguistics is not my area-but I think I can detect very slight traces of snake oil, if you understand my meaning! Clio the Muse 22:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Nyeeees. How about "Slovio". Any joy with that? --Dweller 12:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

No, nothing; by name, by subject, or by keyword. Clio the Muse 22:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I now see that the man has gone red, a sure indication that he has been dropped in the 'memory hole'! In my own estimation 'Slovio' should follow in the same direction. Clio the Muse 07:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

It's happened, lol. --Dweller 08:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

So I see! Clio the Muse 22:25, 3 August 2007 (UTC)