Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.
"ref says he was under 2 metres. you are pathetic trying to make him even taller." is an unacceptable edit summary. Please don't repeat this. Thanks. --Guinnog07:24, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your frustration. Nevertheless, there are better ways to get things done. Please do let me know if there is anything I can do to help you. --Guinnog15:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure I can trust you, however, your meetings with people and photographs are not passable as verifiable proof. As the topic in question has gone through a couple of AfDs with the conclusion that entries should be cited; you will need to add a decent referenece for your additions (interview, quote etc.); as IMDB is open to being even more unreliable than here, I'm afraid that doesn't count as one. SteveLamacq4321:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You know what?! Go back to the french room of Wikipedia! The list of famous tall men is not only your page and 6' 4" and even 6' 3" are even damn tall to me. Revert my edits one more time and I'll be forced to report you!!!
Well I'm not an expert on this subject and as far as I can tell you pretty much disagree on wether or not the German name of scertain towns in Frace should be boldfaced or not. Calling it an attempt to re-write history seems to be needlesly confrontational (I could find no diffs where he actualy dispute that the towns are French). As long as there is no actual vandalism and no disruptive edit war there is not rely a lot an admin can do, we are not rely a part of the process of resolving disputes. If you feel he is pushing a pro-German POV in multiple articles and simply talking to him doesn't help I think your best bet would be opening a request for comments on his conduct, failure to follow the manual of style and whatever else. --Sherool(talk)17:27, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here, it seems like you need to get familiar with the Naming convention agreement, ill pull up some of the precedents of it:
This page is affected by the Gdańsk (Danzig) Vote. The following rules apply in the case of disputes:
For Gdańsk, use the name Danzig between 1308 and 1945
For Gdańsk, use the name Gdańsk before 1308 and after 1945
In biographies of clearly German persons, the name should be used in the form Danzig (Gdańsk) and later Danzig exclusively
In biographies of clearly Polish persons, the name should be used in the form Gdańsk (Danzig) and later Gdańsk exclusively.
For Gdansk and other locations that share a history between Germany and Poland, the first reference of one name in an article should also include a reference to other names, e.g. Danzig (now Gdańsk, Poland) or Gdańsk (Danzig). An English language reference that primarily uses this name should be provided on the talk page if a dispute arises.
Reverts to conform with community consensus are excluded from the three-revert rule (3RR). Only the place names can be reverted exempt from the 3RR according to the outcome of this vote, additional changes fall again under the 3RR. Please use descriptive edit summaries.
The detailed vote results and the vote itself can be found on Talk:Gdansk/Vote. This vote has ended; please do not vote anymore. Comments and discussions can be added to Talk:Gdansk/Vote/discussion anytime. This template {{Gdansk-Vote-Notice}} can be added on the talk page of affected articles if necessary.
You can actually read it and then delete it because it takes a lot of space.But anyway , this led to a naming convention agreement where towns with multiple histories SHOULD have these names boldened(check out this: Talk:Gdańsk#My_edits) and parenthesized next to the name, and by the way personal attacks can get you blocked for a lengthy amount of time on wikipedia. Merry Christmas & Happy Holidays -- Hrödberäht17:40, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Its hard to understand what you just said,but i should tell you that im not doing anything at all to "manipulate" history, im just following the rules by adhering to the agreements on naming places, and on not making personal attacks. anyway, hopefully you read the entirity of the previous message i sent you.-- Hrödberäht17:56, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they did change it before, but they had mistakenly thought that the agreement said not to bolden them, but a second check clarified that they had made a mistake in that respect. , and besides this happened 4 tagen ago and we all agree on the article structure now.-- Hrödberäht18:07, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any need to intervene here. It seems the user is making a commendable effort to explain why he or she is making such a change. The only thing that is blockable is WP:3RR, and that has not been done in this case. I would suggest coming to an agreement on the article's talk page. You all have a Merry Christmas. —Pilotguy (ptt)18:10, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"...is it a conspiration against you ?" Well, I can't see why there would be a conpiracy? Haha, well the alsatian name also falls under the conflicting histories category, so i bolden that as well, but a conpiracy? a conspiracy would have to lead to the involved users being blocked-- Hrödberäht18:18, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, now you are starting to seem like a vandal, please stop reverting my edits or im going to have to report you, and you will most likely be blocked, and i have to say its very immature of you to call it ARYANISATION, I HATE HITLER HE ALMOST COST MY FAMILY THEIR LIVES AND I WOULDNT BE HERE TODAY IF IT WERENT FOR THEM ESCAPING and I HATE Nazi Germany, And Fascism and EVERYTHING THAT GOES WITH IT, so please act maturely when making accusations!-- Hrödberäht18:26, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Everyone is shouting at you here, so I thought I'd just pop by to say 'YO' (and 'thanks') to you for your minor changes on Gilberto Silva. I hope this evens up the hate to love ratio on this page a bit.
I did read it. It's not for us to say what they meant, simply to present. And leave the reader to decide. If you feel it is contrdictory, I'll change it to another source.Halbared07:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So there are multiple sources that say he is 6 ft 5 in. You have two that say he is over 200 cm. Hmm, a situation like André the Giant perhaps? I advise we either delete him from the lsit citing irreconcilable sites...or we list all the sources on his homepage and simply write a ref like has been done for André...what do you say??Halbared10:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He boxed in the 30's, smaller sizes for boxers doesn'y sound unreasonable to me. We can leave him at 6 ft 7 in but I am going to add a few more refs, ala Andre.
As for Toni he was removed before for disputed heights, and the other fella...notable? That's debatable, I don't think he is but I am going to look into it further whan I have timeHalbared14:25, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, at this point it is likely you will receive a 24 hour block. Please do not continue revert warring on this. You and I see eye to eye here, RCS, and I agree that the list is too long, but if you keep getting blocked for revert warring, this will undermine your contribution to the consensus. Please keep the battle on the talk page for the next few days to give time for consensus to develop. See WP:3RR#I've violated 3RR. What do I do? and WP:AN3RR#User:RCS reported by User:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (Result:) where you might consider leaving an apology, although I don't know if that will help anything. Right or wrong, revert warring is just not the way we do things here. — coelacantalk — 05:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow Nick, if you had just one single glance at the history of that page, you'd see how unjust you act. But then, i don't give a sh*t. RCS11:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Then i must say that the unfair, shortsighted and inept way Nick treated that case (accusing me of having continued warring after having been reported, which is not true - is this warring ?) says a good deal about why India could have been submitted to foreign rule by various invaders for several centuries. The List of tall men is a haven and harbour for vandals and unfruitful contributions, and a simple glance at its recent history [1] proves that i have been generally committed to improving it. RCS17:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you feel you have been treated unfairly there are far better ways to address it than making these kinds of racial slurs and insults. I see I warned you about personal attacks a few weeks ago. Please try to focus on the business of building an encyclopedia and refrain from focussing on what you perceive as the failings of other contributors. If you continue like this I will have to block you. Racism is not just offensive but very very unhelpful to the goal of improving the project. I hope you understand. --Guinnog13:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that you've reverted my edit. Here is a link [2] as an evidence that 197 cm is also 6' 6". Please do not revert this edit any more. Thanks. Morris Munroe15:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes and 6' 5.56" is rounded 6' 6". It could be that 1.97 m is 6' 5.5" but there are also many sources which say that 1.97 is 6' 6". So it is better to list 1.97 as 6' 6". Morris Munroe08:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Take 6' 5" for example. Many sources say that 6' 5" is also 195 cm. But 6' 5" is often listed as 1,96 m because 6' 5" is exactly 195,58 m. They also round 6' 5" to 1,96 meters. Morris Munroe08:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have been accused of being a vandal on User:LUCPOL/Vandal:R9tgokunks due to past editing disputes with yourself, or other being involved in ways with yourself. Since you have been mentioned, i'd like to ask if you could please comment on the mentioned report, Thanks much. -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 15:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is in fact a content dispute. You and this user disagree about what should be included in this article. The other user is not defacing the article. This report does not belong on AIV. Heimstern Läufer07:47, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you can't get the other user to talk to you, consider getting a third opinion. Failing that, sometimes a request for comments can help. I know it can be frustrating to deal with people who won't negotiate, but this is not a case where it would be justified for me to block. Try to seek resolution in other ways. Heimstern Läufer07:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have left you suggestions concerning what to do. That is all I can do for you. I cannot block him; he has not committed vandalism. I'm sorry, but there is no point in continuing to come to me about this. Heimstern Läufer18:14, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As I've discussed at length, this is a content dispute between you and the other user. I do not know much about the article's subject, and therefore am not really in a position to comment on what edits are helpful or unhelpful. Please note also that my talk page is not the Wikipedia complaints department. Head for dispute resolution if talking to the other user doesn't help. I have nothing more to say on this matter. Thanks. Heimstern Läufer07:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but I'm not exactly sure why you're telling me. I'm not invloved in you dispute and have no intention of becoming involved in it. Just so you know, if you have difficulties with him, please don't post on my talk page about it. Head for WP:AN3RR if he violates the three-revert rule or dispute resoltuion if you just need to resolve a dispute with him. Thanks. Heimstern Läufer20:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok then since you are personally attacking me, i guess i will remove the chart i made...YEAH I MADE THAT WHOLE DAMN CHART...guess I'm clueless and idiotic and deserve to goto hell and be tortured huh? -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 18:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay now, RCS, I can understand it if people get a bit exasperated at times, but I must still remind you to stay civil. The kinds of insults you've been using are way over the top. Please stop it or I'll have to block you. Fut.Perf.☼19:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please do notattack other editors in edit summaries, as you did here. This is unnecessary and inflammatory; it is also prohibited on Wikipedia. Even if another editor is behaving inappropriately you are required to not make personal attacks. If you continue to do this, you will be blocked for disruption. Thanks, Gwernol23:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was beginning to wonder but wasn't bothered unless the edits went too far. Although while I expected him to be in some kind of position, I didn't quite expect that position. Do you think this conflicts with Wikipedia's policy at all? He isn't writing about his own organisation, if he does then perhaps action is needed but otherwise I say we just keep an eye on his edits to prevent bias. If we do that then I'm sure his contributions will be valuable (do hang around the talk page when you have the time though, incase I get into an edit war). Thanks for the heads up though. - J Logant: 18:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I agree, which is why I've been taking it to the talk page and creating a separate section for the two arguments. In particular I don't have much in the way of pro-Strasbourg sources - he commented that I hadn't looked far for them but I didn't look far for Brussels, it's just everywhere - all over the media which is why I know about it. Although I myself am pro-Brussels it is not by much and only for pragmatic reasons - I love Strasbourg and it is a fantastic city so I hope he brings forward the pro-Strasbourg arguments, I love debate, I just wish he would cite it more. One thing I am concerned about it the citations being weighed to very few people. For example, the criticism of Wallström. I can't even find the press release he talked about, let alone a single other reference to any criticism of her anyway (on anything actually, she is very popular). As you're pro-Strasbourg, I hope you can thicken out the sources? Thanks. - J Logant: 19:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Could be there is just nothing on the net. But if it was notable it would have been picked up by the press, if it is nowhere then I don't think it should be there. It does have to be notable to appear on Wikipedia after all, and we can't talk about the personal opinions of every MEP. Are we going to include Kilroy's commentary on the CAP or Mussolini on immigration controls based on a lost press release? Still, lets see if he finds it.
One thing though, he is getting someone else to do the Strasbourg info, no doubt from within his org. If there is little citation, we can easily deal with that. But what concerns me is if the sole citation is of their own campaign material. How reliable is that, it would be hard to challenge him on that for sure (especily for me, I my French is very poor still). - J Logant: 19:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, technicaly wrong but we're lacking experts. We should keep an eye and encourage citations on major info but otherwise let them wright, we need CoE info. Thanks for showing me though! - J Logant: 09:02, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, sorry to ask but both I and Arnoutf are away for a while now. When you have a moment can you take a look at the EU article now and then to make sure it things stay under control. I know I can trust your judgement in this so you have my support for anything you need to do, whatever you decided is needed. Hopefully you won't need to do anything, I'd just like to know it's not going to be hijacked again. Thanks. - J Logant: 10:02, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I am suprised it has been so stable, when I got back and saw it all fine again I had to check I wasn't viewing an old offline version! I'm glad you around. - J Logant: 16:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh and great work on the EP buildings page by the way, that has been needing data for a while not but I couldn't find any. Looks great, well worth it. - J Logant: 17:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh not again. Do you think this is worth fighting about? I like to compromise but he is just pushing his stuff all the time and no doubt if no one does anything then he will start again on his other edits which will destroy the GA attempt. I personally find it messy to have them left and right, and I can understand his argument that the Rome one can interfere on larger screens (but I tested it, and so far I haven't found any problems that push things beyond the history section). What do you think? Make a point or leave it? - J Logant: 12:47, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, see, give a bit and he takes all. I've withdrawn the GA, this needs to be sorted before. Time to call in the troops. You know no one has ever pissed me off this much. - J Logant: 17:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and you noticed he did not say yes to arbitration? Helping us somewhat isn't he. Although where exactly on that link? There are loads of places on that page. - J Logant: 13:19, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly can't see it on there, or see your edit for that page. Sorry, but can you tell em what to look for, different page? I searched on the pages I could see for the words European, Lear and RCS but nothing came up. Sorry to be a bother. - J Logant: 13:55, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good lord, sorry about that. I read an "I" before the Just for some reason. Oh so stressed tonight! I'm on it. Do you want me to put you down as a party to this? - J Logant: 14:28, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fantastic! Remind me to give them a hug if they carry on like this. It is great seeing new content like that appear, I was looking at that page the other day and thinking about how an article like that really needed a huge expansion. - J Logant: 14:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, CoE is getting a lot better. Not quite GA, I think it needs a touch of formatting. I reckon we could sort that out, with the content they are bringing in we could get it up to GA. Only problem I can see though is the lack of citation. - J Logant: 15:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I, J Logan, award this barnstar to RCS, for his wide-spread and invaluable contributions for his city and his continent - just where we always need it. Your work has been of incredible help to us all! - J Logant: 10:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think word is spreading. Reads like a promo but I suppose I expect it to. I've removed the images that don't illustrate it (CoE ones) and moved the logo into a normal position. Also added a cite tag for good measure. Not sure if we can do anything on that article as I for one don't have the resouces, however this will start to become a problem if every European organisation in the city starts trying to advertise themselves here. I'm going to put a note on the Council of Europe talk page reminding people of policy. Any suggestions on how to deal with this though? - J Logant: 17:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I quite agree. However does that source state the reasoning of the court? These points look suspicious without reasoning, like with Barrot. - J Logant: 14:43, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh sorry to bring this article up again, A has put up a summery of the four options in regards to the city table. From previous discussions Lear has been the only person in favour of the current one and has reverted any changes. A quick run round of opinions should either show him he is in a minority (if that would do anything) or legitimise his position (just as good as that way we aren't being reverted just because of him). see here. If you could pop an opinion I'd be grateful before it turns into 3 pages of "standard content" vs "consensus" again. Thanks! - J Logant: 13:24, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. And thanks for reminding me, I was going through the talk page trying to find people who had contributed, obviously missed him. Thanks. - J Logant: 14:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Recently there have been some great images of the EP in Brussels popping up on WikiCommons but it seems like we are lacking for Strasbourg. Well, we have plenty of the outside of the main building but not the other buildings or the inside (only one of the hemicycle). When I was there I took a few and I'm going to see if I have some good ones but I fear they are a bit fuzzy so I was wondering if you had some good ones? - J Logant: 09:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, thanks for catching my typo, I keep missing ones in places like that! Anyway, I uploaded one photo of the hemicycle but I haven't used it anywhere as the glass barrier is in the way. Do you think that is much of a problem in a thumbnail? Image:EP Strasbourg hemicycle l-gal.jpg - J Logant: 19:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Okay, well I found one person from there who is in Strasbourg, if I don't hear anything I'll try a general question on there somewhere. I wish it was easier to find them here, if only there was a category. You know there is no userbox for Strasbourg on here (that I can find). Anyway, I found a third image that I just put up, but no more of the hemicycle. Next time I go to Strasbourg I'll have to make better use of my camera! :). Thanks though. - J Logant: 16:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! Though as much. I've been doing the same thing every time I run out of my own photos. Need to be able to find the damn things! So annoying when people don't categorise.. tut tut. - J Logant: 17:26, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh and sorry to bother (again). Its just European Commission is up for FA. There are only a few comments thus far. Don't mind if it is support, oppose or suggestions for improvement but if you have a moment could you drop a comment on the nomination page here. Thanks. - J Logant: 18:58, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On the peer review thing, the main two things you might want to look at is adding more citation and turning some of the lists into prose. For example the institutions section could be improved if there was more of a prose discussion about them rather than a list. Good luck though. - J Logant: 07:40, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And some seema tad familer from when I was in Strasbourg... But anyway, according to the tracers it is "Jean-Charles Cante", not listed on that page but he does have an email (Jean-Charles.Cante@coe.int). Do you think if we improve CoE articles a lot they would pay us? :) - J Logant: 15:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Its interesting to say the least that so many CoE employees are editing Wikipedia. It must either be encouraged or in the media a lot. - J Logant: 16:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to let you know that I have completed the translation of the German article about the Severne affair. Thank you for your earlier edits to improve the translation. If you would like to proofread the article, it would be very helpful. I am especially uncertain about my translations of the poetry.
Thank you for your note! You may address me as "Heldin", please. :-) I make no promises about which articles I will translate. I prefer articles that have very little (or no) information in them to begin with. It is too hard to combine both sets of information -- and what if they don't agree? As I am mostly self-taught in German, I have some rather amazing gaps in my command of the language. If you proofread my translations, look out for things like singular/plural, tenses, leaving out a word or phrase after re-arranging a German sentence, etc.
AH! Fantastic, one of the big articles we've been missing! Been so annoyed we didn't have that one for ages but never got around to doing anything. Great, and sorry about wikilinking to the person, slight foul up. I just saw the slightly misplaced wikilink at the bottom of the page and thought it was linking to their building page, so I just fixed it and saw there was a German one too without thinking it might be the person! Anyway, thanks.- J Logant: 19:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can't say I have and I don't know much about her (hence not getting round to writing anything) so thanks for the heads up!- J Logant: 19:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What the German article calls her is "Alterspräsidentin", which my big dictionary says is, "president by seniority". Literally, it means something like Age-president. According to the Wiki article that RCS cited, this position is reasonably common in various European parliaments, but as an Ami, I'd never heard of it before. I've also never heard of (Mother or) Father of the House. I got the little understanding I had of it by a quick glance at the Wiki article about the EU Parliament. (Sorry, JLogan. We may need to use British spelling and such sometimes, but we can't leave the text incomprehensible to Americans, either. :-) ) So I'm very glad to have your explanatory text added to the article, even if the original German article had it as a single word.
Oh! I just looked at the page about Konrad Adenauer (for a different reason) and found the English word for the Alterspraesident is "doyen" (from the French) - more or less. It means "the senior member, as in age or rank, of a group, class, etc." Wow.
Absolutely! Vive la difference. ;-) By the way, I know you (RCS) have read at least the articles on Louise, Gundula and Zabern. Would you fill out the translation box so they can be categorized as "done", please? Or didn't you consider that you had done a complete proofreading? Thanks so much. Scbarry (talk) 15:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have a preliminary copy of this one done. I'm not at all certain about many of the terms, so I could use your help. It also needs some categories. I'm told that if I put {{uncat]] at the top of the page, someone will come along and categorize it, but if you know what to do, be my guest.
I noticed that you had read this one. Did you proofread it (and forget to update the translation box), or do you still think someone else should proofread it? Just wondering...
I have finished a translation of Eulogius Schneider's article. Again, it needs categorization. It has a lot of difficult words, which I hope I adequately translated. I also have some uncertainties about the capitalization of various things (offices, committees, etc.), since the German capitalization rules are quite different from those in English. Perhaps you know more about what they should be. There are no pictures, even though I really like the ones in the German article. They are not available on the English wiki or in the Commons area. Can you upload them to Commons, or should I try to find someone else who can do that? I assume that they are not under copyright protection by now! I translated everything in the "selected works" section that wasn't italicized -- but then encountered some words which clearly were not in modern German spelling! I went ahead and translated them, anyway, though they may somehow be part of the title (but not in italics). It is ready for proofreading, when you get the time.
OK. Tirkfl has already proofread Eulogius, even before I asked him. :-) I just asked him about the pictures, so perhaps I'll soon be able to add them, too. I think they really add to the story. This one was frustrating to me because I had it about 2/3 done when I accidentally deleted everything and had to start again!
The article mentions very little about what Eulogius did in Strasbourg that was so horrible. Your comment compared him with Stalin, but other than 30 death sentences, I'm not sure what he really did. The quotes from his contemporaries actually shed more light on this than the story itself.
Will you have time to make any more translation suggestions before Christmas?
Thanks for the info. I don't know much about Stalin, to tell you the truth. There are also articles about Schneider in French and Spanish. Do you know if they contain any more information? If you translated anything into German, I could add it to the English article. :-)
OK, now you can take a look and tell me how badly I messed up the terms. :-) Do you think I should translate the names of his works (zB, "string quartet", instead of "Streichquartett", usw)? Tirkfl is on holiday, so I don't suppose he'll be able to help out for a while.
Thanks. But SS's father was employed by the city as an Einspaenner, so I assume it's a coachman, from the context. Now, what is the "Zunft zur Steltz"? A Zunft is a guild. What is Steltz, stilt makers or something???
The story of the 1349 Pogrom in Strasbourg is interesting, but I find that I have to agree with the discussion page that the many old German and Latin quotes without any translation into modern language make it difficult to understand and thus nearly impossible to translate into English. If you (or someone else) translated these into Hochdeutsch, I might be willing to take a look at translating the article, but unfortunately not otherwise.
I was happy to see that you had made changes to the new translation immediately after I finished it. :-) It makes me happy that someone cares enough about what I'm doing to pay such close attention.
Anyway, I hope you can come up with some more ideas to keep me busy. :-)
Have a great Christmas holiday and keep up the good work!
I assume that your "(r)" meant that I made a mistake in my German. Now you know why I can't write in German! (Kasus? Geschlecht? Deklination? Bahnhof???) One of these days I'll teach myself all that stuff but I'm having too much fun right now with what I'm already doing.
The street car article is currently under review, so it doesn't seem like such a good idea to work on a translation right now. Besides, there's quite a bit of text in the existing article which would have to be integrated into a new translation.
How much do you know about mining? I'm looking at the F60 request. I can get the general idea of what it's saying, but I'm not sure about the exact terminology.
I proofread Maria Stader today, too, and filled in some places where the translation was a bit thin. You can look it over to make sure all is well. Danke! Scbarry (talk) 23:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Betr: Mining, that's OK. I did the translation and then asked on the F60 Diskussion page for someone to look it over -- and someone did! :-) Of course, the translation template wasn't changed, so someone still has to "proofread" it, but I think the terminology should be OK. Now, what kind of trouble can I get into today? ;-)
Palais Rohan already exists as a stub in English, so I created a redirect to it from Rohan Palace. Now I'll expand the stub. :-) Scbarry (talk) 17:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you caught that! I'm editing the redirect page now. There is going to have to be a LOT of work done to the disambiguation page for Rohan! Scbarry (talk) 17:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! you renamed the page while I was in the middle of editing it! Luckily, I had gotten up to get a bite to eat before I'd gotten very far in the next phase. :-) Have you looked at the "Rohan" disambig page? Lots and lots of fictional characters, etc.
Wow. We had really managed to mess up the translation template by renaming the article after creating the template. But I think I have it all straightened out now. It's the first time I had "moved" a page, but it seemed to work OK. :-)
Sure I can do that guy. But I have absolutely no idea why you want him. He doesn't seem to have anything at all to do with Strasbourg!!! :-D Scbarry (talk) 21:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
... and Richard Oelze, too? I haven't looked at it yet, but it does make sense to have plenty of stuff for me to work on for the rest of the evening. :-) BTW, I don't think it's a good idea to move pages off the DE translation page until they are Completed (done with proofreading). Otherwise, they're likely to get lost. I just recovered a bunch of templates that had never been moved to the DE page and were lost in the monthly files from the main translations page. Unless, of course, you want to say that you officially proofread Palais Rohan, Strasbourg... Scbarry (talk) 21:19, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, there are some pages that link to Arroyo, but Oelze seems to be an orphan. You might want to fix that. If you'd like to sign off any of the articles as officially proofread, that would be great. The list is getting a little bit long. Scbarry (talk) 02:22, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm working on this translation. It doesn't look like the previous translator has touched it for a long time and it needs a lot of loving care. I'm not done yet (as of this writing) and it doesn't look like it will be quick to complete. But since I know you know something about art, could you take a look at the categories and all that sort of thing, please?
I got into it because Wiki told me that it mentioned our friend, Oelze (but hadn't linked to him), so I took a look. And then I got caught!
What is left is to translate about 223 German titles for paintings into English -- hopefully the same ones normally used for the paintings! It looks like a time-consuming job. :-(
I understand what you mean. The weird thing, from my point of view, is that it is geared toward being about the BBC show (in the English Wiki), but clearly geared toward being about the German show (in the German Wiki). En even has it categorized under BBC programs. The order of the sections had to be changed around to discuss the BBC show first, rather than more as a sub-topic, as in the German article. Someone asked for the translation, but quite likely didn't know exactly what he was going to get.
The BBC show stopped after 100; the WDR show kept going for quite a while after that. Thus, the list includes quite a few more paintings than would be needed for an article purely about the BBC show. If I had the books (or had even seen some of the shows - I don't watch TV at all and haven't for years), I could simply look up which ones applied and figure out the English names for the paintings -- but I don't! So I'm doing the best I can. I'm using Wiki to look up each painter and see if the name of the painting is mentioned. I'm learning lots about painters, but I don't always find the name of the painting. So then I have to fall back on a straight translation from the German title. Ugh, not fun.
But the article had been barely started (left at "99% translated" and needing proofreader) and desperately needed something done with it. Hopefully, someone who knows what's going on and cares about it can do something better with the article later.
I do think I've read about her. (I read the ARD website every day.) It's a very long article and it uses a lot of words that I don't think would be in my dictionary. While I understand the concepts, I'm not sure I'd know what the appropriate English translations would be. (zB, Ehrenmord comes to mind.) The issues don't occur so much in the US (as far as I know, not watching TV news), so it might well require some explanation to the English-speaking public, which I'm not sure I could adequately do. The page is closed for many updates in de because of vandalism, so I'm not sure if the same thing would occur here, too. Just 'cuz I'm a Heldin doesn't necessarily mean that I want to write about every Frauenrechtlerin. :-) I find myself somewhere in between the two "camps" in this area, and I'm not sure I want to "take a stand" by getting involved with this debate. :-{ But thanks for thinking of me... Scbarry (talk) 13:35, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, "honor killing" or "honor murder" are the obvious literal translations for that term, but is it the one which is currently being used in the englisch-sprachige Raum (if indeed there is a term for that which is being used)? I honestly don't know. It's one of the risks/liabilities of me avoiding the English-language news media. But that term is only one of several. And the rest of my comment above still stands. Scbarry (talk) 14:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Necla ist jetzt da. It is not one of my better efforts and could still use cleanup, etc. I kept very little of the previous article, except the categories and the two links that are now the last two under "interviews", although I don't know if they still apply.
It is up to you to maintain this page. I don't expect to do anything else with it.
Thanks for suggesting another translation. It's been rather quiet today. Perhaps too quiet. I got into mischief and re-filed the requests on the German translation page, as you no doubt saw. I hope that will be OK. I didn't mean for people not to post new stuff at the top as before, just that the stuff that was already there was too much. I wrote on the translations talk page after the fact to tell people about it, but I don't know how many people read that page.
I just looked at Johannes' article. It looks pretty interesting. But what is a "49-line Latin
Bible"? No matter how small the print is, I can't imagine a whole Bible being printed on 49 lines! Or am I not understanding "49-zeilige" correctly? Scbarry (talk) 23:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Of the two pictures in the article, only one is in Commons. Do you know how to upload a picture to Commons, or should I ask Tirkfl when he returns?
There is a list of things he printed on the Diskussion (!?!?!?!) page of the German article. A rather odd place to put that, if you ask me. Do you have any ideas what to do with them? Should I ignore them or try to fit them into the article somehow?
Are you trying to fill in the notable personages from Selestat now? :-)
You're welcome. I made a couple of fixes and re-worded the 49-line part. Thanks for the categorization. Although I've made a few attempts at categorizing, I find the category pages extremely frustrating and inadequate, so I prefer to let someone else do it, if I can. :-) I'm nearly done, with the exception of the second picture (if possible, but I'm not going to try to upload it) and the question about what to do with the list of his printed works (if anything). So the article will probably stay at less than 100% done for a while. Viel Spass! Scbarry (talk) 14:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Tirkfl just translated a German article about this French philatelist -- who happens to have been born in Strasbourg. If he's not on your lists of famous people, you can add him, and you can also add the appropriate category to the article itself, if you'd like. Scbarry (talk) 17:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I remember seeing this a while back, was wondering if you had heard any such details on the development of the area? Might an idea to expand the page to include more details like the Brussels and the European Union page? What do you think?- J Logant: 12:59, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
(btw, the link: see the very bottom of the page for the bit on the EP)- J Logant: 13:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but none of these building sites are related to the Parliament : two new CoE buildings and a tramway line ( with a stop Parlement Européen, admittedly ). All these buildings are already finished and functioning by now. Cheers, RCS (talk) 14:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, I was thinking about the relationship between the Parliament and Strasbourg - for another page one day I suppose.- J Logant: 14:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If I may I believe such additions may be best suited to the Palace of Europe article perhaps?
Well, of course not, the Palace of Europe is just one building out of seven.
Unless I am mistaken there isn't even a hyperlink to that article in that new next.
Of course, the Palace of Europe is hyperlinked in the article Council of Europe, but you are right, i'll emphsize it even more, it can't hurt.
It was hyperlinked yes, but not in that section which I now see has been seen to. I know it is a small issue but it seemed appropriate.
However the idea of the section itself would be good for the CoE article, but it should perhaps concentrate more on the choice of Strasbourg as the seat of the Council rather than its choice of buildings in the city.
It was intended as a kind of urban geography course, but i get your point.
Indeed, now I think about it we are lacking any particular detail on Strasbourg as a European centre, if indeed you do have the information I have suggested above in any detail it might we productive for us to work on a new article about Strasbourg and European institutions? It could bring together in one comprehensive location all the detail on the European credentials of the city, the use of the old Council buildings by both the CoE and the EP, the choice of Strasbourg by the Council and later by the Parliament and the ensuing debate, the relationship with the authority in Strasbourg (buying the buildings), the European Washington D.C.-style plan (I can't find any English data on that, all in French and German, can you take a look?), impact of the institutions on the city (you can't get a hotel room when the Parliament is in session), the European nature of the people (one of the few areas to have a strong vote for the constitution). Anyway, you get the idea. I could help on it but one of the big problems I faced when I last looked into it was the lack of English language data. If you know of good places to look, it might be an idea. What do you think? - J Logant: 21:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cafébabel has kindly given us an article on Strasbourg and the EP here. I'm going to work on using it as a base for a sister article for Brussels and the European Union. Thought I'd just run the title by you before its create: "Strasbourg and European integration". If not that, then maybe "Strasbourg as a European centre"? I don't really want to use capital for obvious reasons - same as Brussels - and can't relate just to the EU like I did with Brussels. What do you think?- J Logant: 11:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Created, well, stub-ish. Something is down now so it can be added to bit by bit. Can't work on it any longer right now, will come back to it when I haev the chance. I have a book on Brussels and the EU now so I will be working on that too when I get some time.- J Logant: 17:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes... well I'm sure I could turn them all blue but it may take me a year or so at the rate I'm going right now! :)- J Logant: 09:04, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you study the likes of Sieffert, Gresh, Vidal and Pappé, the point of view of an Irish diplomat can be a refreshing change. Cheers, RCS (talk) 14:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Salut Frank ;-)
J'espère que tu vas bien mais que tu ne vas pas venir jusqu'ici me chercher des poux dans la tête avec le Mufti :-)
Salut,
Je ne suis pas sur de saisir le sens de ton message... :-)
Si tu veux porter à ma connaissance le fond de l'affaire, je le connais : fr:Affaire Tantoura. L'avis de Yoav Gelber et de Benny Morris sont très clairs (cfr les liens donnés dans la partie documentation de l'article).
Si tu veux me dire que les fr:Nouveaux historiens sont des falsificateurs, tu as tort. Je pense d'ailleurs que tu ne sais pas ce qu'ils ont écrit mais que tu ne fais que suivre un mouvement et un amalgame... Il n'y a rien de bien terrible pour la plupart.
Si tu veux me dire qu'Ilan Pappé, lui, est un falsificateur, je te trouve du coup trop gentil. Je n'ai aucune estime pour lui en fonction de l'interprétation qu'il donne aux événements et du biais et images tronquées et biaisées qu'il présente...
Je ne connaissais pas cette page mais en gros 95% du contenu de l'affaire.
Perso, je ne contribue plus sur wp:fr. Et je n'ai toujours contribué qu'anecdotiquement ici. Mais je ne savais pas que tu avais été bloqué. j'avais complètement oublié que tu étais bloqué... Mais ce n'est plus le cas depuis le 18 on dirait...
Bonne continuation sur les différents wiki's; mais loin des polémiques :-)
Interesting, though of course we know so little as first in doesn't mean a big impact. Might be worth noting in the history articles like European integration? Such articles are very weak and could do with such info. Good find though.- J Logant: 16:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed that you are active in the area of Europe. I just wanted to let you know that a European Space Agency task force has been set up to improve the presently very poor condition of articles about ESA and related topics. If you are interested, please join the task force here. We sure could use your help. Thanks.U5K0 (talk) 19:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thanks for letting me know. I doubt i'll ever be helpful in this particular area, but if it ever happened, i'll be glad to have obliged. Cheers, RCS (talk) 12:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I really ought to proof read my work occasionally. Wrote the sentence once, changed a bit and forgot to change the rest... oops! I keep doing that! :)- J.Logan(t): 11:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Salut Claude-Jean, as-tu eu l'occasion de lire le livre de Conor Cruise O'Brien dont je t'avais parlé depuis la dernière fois ? Simple curiosité. Porte-toi bien, RCS (talk) 08:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC) (J de mon vrai prénom)[reply]
Salut,
Heu... Non (shamed)
Mais bon, il y a des dizaines de livres que j'aimerais lire mais wikipédia m'en empêche ;-)
Addendum: The main issue under discussion is your personal attack on another editor here, which not only assumes bad faith in a fairly spectacular way, but is personally very offensive (and would be to any right-minded person). Comments like this, and your apparent history of attacking other editors and using WP:AIV as a forum to try to 'win' content disputes, will result in sanctions being applied to your account. Should this happen again, a block will be issued without further warning (and you may yet be blocked as a result of the ANI thread).
If another editor removes content you have added, the correct procedure is to assume they have a good reason for doing so, open a talk-page discussion to determine why the content was removed, and to get the input of other editors. EyeSerenetalk09:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you saw that i have been talking on the talk page on Lauren Booth long before User:J ever noticed its very existence. Removing, for no good reason except WP:OWN (which is not a good reason either), an expression that had made the headlines of two of the main Israeli newspapers, and edit-warring several people in order to do so, is, at best, and again candidly speaking, bloody suspect indeed. Cheers, RCS (talk) 10:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe fewer words would be more clear. Don't attack other editors. Find a way to make your point without comparing a good-faith editor with a differing opinion to a Holocaust denier. It can be done. Don't report content disputes to WP:AIV. As it is apparently not the first time you've violated these behavioral standards, the next may result in a block. MastCellTalk18:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just started Strasbourg-Ortenau, about time I thought. I'm lacking detail though, know anything helpful? Also, I was wondering what you know about this plan from Strasbourg in July, that Roland Ries put forward a plan for a European district modelled on Washington D.C. in order to keep Parliament?- J.Logan`t: 12:27, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You have been blocked for personal attacks/uncivil accusations (specifically this comment), in addition to edit warring. When you are involved in an editing dispute it is imperative that you follow Wikipedia's policies on personal attacks and civility. Looking at your talk page, I see repeated warnings for such comments, often they can only make a situation worse. In addition, please refrain from edit warring and follow the dispute resolution process properly when you come back. Thank you. Khoikhoi23:28, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The translation to portuguese is done (Em 1810, a segunda esposa de Napoleão, Maria Luisa, Duquesa de Parma, passou no palácio a sua primeira noite em solo francês. Outro hóspede real foi o Rei Carlos X de França, em 1828.).
I noticed that you have a couple of museum translation requests for German articles. I'm still getting used to Wiki again, after being off for several months. I'm currently doing some proofreading, but I might take a look at these two translations of yours after I've finished with them. But perhaps you can help me with a word (since it's in one of the museum articles, as well as one of the things I'm proofreading!). The word is Bauhütte. Can you tell me what it means?
You can proofread Notre Dame, if you'd like. Also check the categories and redlinks and all that stuff. I did the best I could, but there are still some left. Viel Spass! Scbarry (talk) 04:02, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Die Uebersetzung von Beaux-Arts ist fertig. Du kannst sie jetzt kontrollieren. Danke.
Danke auch fuer die Ueberpruefung von Notre Dame. Du bist immer sehr fleissig, nach eine Uebersetzung fertig ist. ;-) Viel Spass! Scbarry (talk) 18:35, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Peut-etre. Mais... I don't think the first picture is in Wikimedia Commons. Do you know how to upload it there, if it is eligible for that? Otherwise, there is a picture at Image:Strasbourg-RemiLeblond-ENA-MAMC2.jpg, which isn't really as nice, but might do in an emergency. Not sure if I'll have time today or not, but I might a bit later. If you do know how to load pictures to Commons, can you explain it to me sometime? I'd really like to know how, but never could figure it out from the descriptions I've read. Merci Scbarry (talk) 10:16, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think I managed to get the museum picture uploaded to wikicommons! However, the accent and apostrophe are no longer in the picture name. :-( Not sure when I'll get around to doing the article, though. I had the hardest time trying to figure out the directions, but it doesn't really seem that bad to do, even with my modem. :-) Scbarry (talk) 03:58, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour! If you would like to check out the work on the MAMCS article, that would be wonderful. Thank you for the new expression (da bin ich ueberfragt). It's even in my dictionary. I love finding new words and expressions. Scbarry (talk) 22:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Edelseider - Thanks for looking over the article. I'm still not sure what the Sitzungssaal is. (Is it the nave, or an auditorium of some sort, or what?)
Thanks too for the new translation request. Are we already done with all the Strasbourg subjects you know about? This small town doesn't look as "important" as most of your requests.
Did you know that we're nearly neighbors? Boston and Strasbourg are sister cities. ;-)
Thanks for the additional pointers. I think you'd better get busy and upgrade the German articles or add the information from the French site to the German one before I look at them. :-) (I think I mentioned once that my French is extremely bad.) Scbarry (talk) 23:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, you can take a look at Rouffach now. There are several terms that have comments in the text that you should look at. One is that a French name for the Gymnasium is needed. Another is that either "town" or "city" should be decided on. The German article used both Ort and Stadt, so I was not consistent. All the pictures are there, but you will probably want to re-arrange them to make it look nicer. Scbarry (talk) 02:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You can check out Claude V now. I tried to reference the Swiss site in the references to find out what language it was in, but I got error messages. You should verify that it still works. Scbarry (talk) 19:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Saint-Pierre-le-Jeune Protestant Church is now ready for you to look at, if you'd like. I'm not at all happy with the "footnotes" which point to external images. They don't follow the Wiki style and aren't really "References". Note that the images in notes 3 and 9 are identical. It looks like quite a magnificent church. Scbarry (talk) 00:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sainte-Madeleine Church, Strasbourg is now ready for you to look at. As I mentioned, my French is rather awful, so with the aid of a Google translation and my (smaller) French dictionary, I gave it a try. Be sure to check it out carefully. There are several unknown words in it, especially regarding the organ. I also had some trouble with the translation template at the bottom of the page. Have fun with it! Scbarry (talk) 18:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for checking it out. I practically tore out my hair with the thing at the bottom, so I'm glad you figured it out. Do you have any other ideas? The other church you suggested is also in French and larger than Madeleine, and it wasn't much fun to do this one. Scbarry (talk) 19:35, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please check on a fact in the St. Madeleine article? There is a decree from 1898 mentioned, but that date doesn't seem right to me, since Beblo's version of the church was in the early 1900s and it was rebuilt after that. Also, if you have any other translation suggestions, I'd love to hear them. I hope you're not unhappy with all the extra work I've been making you do lately. Scbarry (talk) 05:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - I can't believe it. My PC has died again. I'm going to see if I can get another one, but it may take a little time before I can get back to Wiki. (Insert your favorite German swear word here.) Scbarry (talk) 16:24, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think needs to be changed in the template code? Both the population number and the census year (the data that are changed when we start using the new census data) are given in each article, not in the template code itself. MarkussepTalk18:07, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could you look at this diff and tell me if you think the change is correct, because I think this could turn out to be a biased article as I do think I am probably a little Biased. 22:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
i made a long paragraph short [3], i think this is the best to do. Considerations on the blockade should be put into the article on it. Cheers, --RCS (talk) 08:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
RE Dreams (saves starting a new section): Oh if only. The odd thing is, I remember correcting that when I typed it.... sometimes I feel like I am editing in my dream...- J.Logan`t: 19:35, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, could you please give your opinion, for either side, on the Flag of Europe talk page? This is going to go round with circles without another opinion pushing it one way or another. Thanks.- J.Logan`t: 10:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean to sound mean, but you put this up for GA yourself, can't you deal with a few cite tags? My time is being squeezed right now, I'll see if I can get a few done but I probably won't have time to do them all.- J.Logan`t: 13:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What's wrong with today's date? If it says the same thing then it doesn't matter. I don't know what date I accessed them, it was ages ago.- J.Logan`t: 14:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry you hastened to revert my edits while I was in the middle of them. If you've got the energy for it, please fix the article to your satisfaction. It is pushed and pulled every which way by the factions who portray her variously as a neo-Nazi monster or a sad misunderstood beauty queen and socialite. Please give a hard look to the version you just restored and make sure it's free of unsourced and PoV commentary, e.g., " claims regarded by most as preposterous", "conspiracy theories like that led many to question her sanity." Even a sourced statement about the extremity of her views comes across as PoV when placed up front in an article that's subject to such contention as this one. (And, finally, the article isn't "mine"; it's Wikipedia's, and I'm just trying to make the thing as neutral as possible.) JohnInDC (talk) 14:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, as you say, wholesale reverts are not helpful. I agree, but why have you you made a wholsale revert of this IP's edits, then? You should have assumed its good faith and have been more careful. Just as you say, or would say. --RCS (talk) 14:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You have a point as well. I reverted them wholesale because I had believed that the basic article was more or less okay but plainly I had lost track of the thing and lots of fluff and puffery had made its way back in. That's what I was trying to fix. Anyhow I've been tweaking the thing, as you restored it, and I think it's back closer to the middle now. JohnInDC (talk) 14:43, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know about this. You're right, aaaargh is not a reliable source. I'll take a look at the Renouf article now. Jayjg (talk)20:39, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speculation about the internal workings of another editor's brain are off-topic and unneccessary. It's sufficient for our purposes to say that the edits are unhelpful or disruptive. If you start making guesses about someone's mental state, it can only drive the discussion off-topic, as you see happening at WP:AN right now. Friday(talk)18:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, alright, but i sincerely wonder(ed), and i expressed it. It would not be the first time someone showed a "bizarre" attitude to reality and facts. Do you know who to ask for the programmation of a bot? Thank you! --RCS (talk) 18:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi RCS. Ksnow is capable of being quite reasonable; all you have to is speak to her politely. She does a lot of semi-automated edits, and cheerfully undoes them if asked in a reasonable manner. Thanks, Antandrus (talk)19:32, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See [5] - also, his user page does say that one of his goals is to see the keywords "Pseudo Science or Pseudo History are included in all pages dealing with the works of Holocaust Revisionists AKA Holocaust Deniers / Genocide Deniers, as these keywords seem to be missing from many of these articles giving the false impression about this kind of research."I did ask him to read WP:Consensus but I don't know if he did, he's looking for rules and regulations. Dougweller (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand where you are coming from, and can't say it isn't possible, but it's best to AGF - let him be the one making personal attacks. If you are right, I'm sure we'll find out sooner or later. Dougweller (talk) 17:16, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you added to the stub biography of Danjon the information "Director of the Observatory of Strasbourg from 1930 to 1945". An interesting addition, but I have a question about the content of your source. I can see that your source supports "from 1930", but from where do you get "to 1945"? The encyclopedia article indicates that Danjon encountered difficulties with the wartime German authorities, and it does not appear to be made clear that he remained in post e.g. during the period 1942-45. Unless there is clear positive averment of Danjon's continuance in post to 1945, I suggest that the article text might better be restricted to say just "from 1930". With good wishes. Terry0051 (talk) 09:36, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, this is clear enough: Lorsque la Seconde Guerre mondiale est déclarée, Strasbourg se replie à Clermont-Ferrand. En août 1941, Danjon suit le mouvement avec presque tout le personnel de l´observatoire, laissant sur place une équipe très réduite. L´observatoire dispose alors de deux directeurs : Danjon à Clermont-Ferrand et Johannes Hellerich à Strasbourg. Pendant la guerre, les possibilités de travail sont pourtant limitées. Until 1945 is therefore correct. Regards, --RCS (talk) 10:17, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your replies here and on my talk page. My previous remark was directed to the sources available from the article page. I agree that the new sources you have cited on your talk page and on mine make the matter clear. So I'm copying this exchange to the article's talk page, where it will be easily visible and can be incorporated when somebody has a moment. Regards, Terry0051 (talk) 18:26, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not a joke, a misunderstanding of the whole situation. However, now that I understand the entire situation, I still stand by the edit put forth by the IP as seen at the articles talk page.DrewSmithWhat I've done06:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I noticed you started a new thread on Drew Smith, when there was already a thread regarding the Ip he was defending a little further up on WP:ANI. I agree with what you've said and have I no idea why Drew Smith is behaving in this extraordinary manner. I think it would be more helpful if you repositioned your comment in the previous thread if it's not too late. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 07:38, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have tried to list it in WP:SPI now, just in case, but somehow i failed to master the subtle technique of editing that page. Cheers, --RCS (talk) 09:43, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You might need to ask an expert for help. I should point out that I'm not making fun of your user ID, I actually do have trouble remembering user names unless they stand out in some way. Because I put a comment on your page, you're on my watch list for the time being, so I should be able to remember it now. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots09:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind. Yes, this page is extremely difficult to edit and i can see the purpose of why it has been conceived so. For the time being i won't make any request, but you must admit that all these IP's suddenly popping up on ANI is very strange. Another admin's input should be helpful. Cheers, --RCS (talk) 09:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above statement by Drew R. Smith is not correct. This editor jumps to conclusions without the slightest shred of evidence. Mathsci (talk) 13:14, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Coincidence. They just needed a Pole from the right, he is very high profile. His age is testament to his high profile (anti-communist). Especially considering the term is only two and a half years, I don't think they elected him to die quickly if that is what you mean by transition. The more important thing is that they are continuing with the grand coalition.- J.Logan`t: 13:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello!" Thank you for categorising of Alsatian Jews! But I don't think Alsatian Jews are subdivision of French Jews (They have relationship with Germany and Eastern Europe, Also they are German-speaking Jews (Western Yiddish, Ashkenazi)). I'm against xenophobia. --Gudshead (talk) 12:26, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On November 11, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Argentoratum, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
The photo that you added certainly represents a splendid example. However, all the pics have been chosen for the clear details of their image, so that the narrative is obviously apparent to the viewer. If you look down the article, towards the bottom is a section for particularly fine examples, which can be linked to an article. This church and its portal ought to have a place as one of the great examples of a narrative scheme. I don't have any information, so can I please request that you add some. Amandajm (talk) 10:20, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I took a look and it seems its just the sculptured facade, with statues extending the scheme. Wonder who the statues represent? Can you dig up inf and do a page on this? Amandajm (talk) 22:17, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent! But I'm sorry to have to say this... because this is English Wikipedia, could you please move the new page to its English name and have its foreign name in brackets, rather than the other way around. Them's the rules (as they say...)Amandajm (talk) 10:09, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a usable source in the article, either (as is explained at the BLPN link I provided above). If a reliable source has published his vendetta against this woman, then it can be included. Meanwhile, you should be aware that BLP also covers talk pages. --Moonriddengirl(talk)23:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An individual's view, reported on a blog, is POV and not suitable for WP (it gives rise to BLP issues). Do not re-add (cf above). --AlisonW (talk) 11:17, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, yes, i understood your position very well. Now, i have expanded the section, and if you remove it again, i'll report the matter at WP:ANI. --RCS (talk) 11:18, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You now have a three-hour block to reconsider your actions in repeatedly violating the BLP policies. I strongly suggest you read the policies and guidelines you have been pointed at by Moonriddengirl. --AlisonW (talk) 11:21, 19 November 2009 (UTC) ps. "Opinions" are POV, by definition! --AlisonW (talk) 11:22, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict) I have. And all i see is a feminist rushing to defend a female journalist in distress. Here you complained about it being one (1) point of view, but when i gave you another, making two, you were still not content. Another editor had no problems with the issue ([7]). I challenge you to prove me that you are neutral on the matter and not acting out of misplaced inter-feminine solidarity alone. --RCS (talk) 11:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ROFL! Oh dear, no. My attention was drawn to this matter via OTRS and the BLP problem you keep creating, and for no other reason. --AlisonW (talk) 12:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That is certainly your prerogative, however I doubt it will progress far. You are trying to include content which is hearsay at best and POV by definition. --AlisonW (talk) 12:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On January 3, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Château des Rohan (Mutzig), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Haaretz is a reliable source, and she wrote it in a lettre to an ambassador. It is up to her to behave in a civilized way! --RCS (talk) 16:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello RCS! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 3 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
Hello, RCS. You have new messages at WP:Request for page protection. Message added 08:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hey. Just so you know, you did hit 3RR on the article already. It's good that you sought outside help, though, and I'll do what I can to help everyone get past this issue. Still, you should probably avoid further reversions on that page. — HelloAnnyong(say whaaat?!)13:10, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On February 15, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Niederhaslach Church, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On March 6, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jesuit Church, Molsheim, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Yeah. I semi-protected both pages for a week. If it continues after that expires, we may have to renew semi-protection as necessary. Cool HandLuke17:05, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Harmful? My dear Gwen, you seem not to know what the case in question was all about. The irony of my edit - which I find funny - can be understood with the hindsight of how that case turned out, i. e. that the rape in question never took place and that the so-called victim was in fact a compulsive liar with a history of court convictions that has continued since. But I suppose that you are another of these self-righteous people with a mission with whom arguing is nothing but a waste of time. --RCS (talk) 11:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was excited to see your edits to Observatory of Strasbourg, as there is a deficit of people working on observatories and telescopes. I hope at some point you can come back and put whatever this was behind you, as there is a lot needed in this area, and in astronomy in general. Fotaun (talk) 18:43, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed the message you recently left to a newcomer. Please remember: do not bite the newcomers. If you see someone make a common mistake, try to politely point out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Thank you.B@xter 9 16:09, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Jesuit Church, Molsheim at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Materialscientist (talk) 07:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
