User talk:St.Trond

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

Hello

I read English and Scandinavian.

USVA headstone emb-16.jpg This user is a devout atheist.


... How can I be an Atheist? Because He promises Grace.

Re Grace: I enjoyed reading your position - Ret.Prof (talk) 03:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Recommended reading:

Alvar Ellegard: Jesus - – One Hundred Years Before Christ: A Study In Creative Mythology, (London 1999). ISBN 0-87951-720-4

Christoph Luxenberg: The_Syro-Aramaic_Reading_of_the_Koran (Germany 2007). ISBN 3-89930-088-2

Do you have any sources to back this[edit]

On Dec 6 2009 you amended the "Hundred_(county_subdivision)" article: 'The names "hundred" and "kihlakunta" are derived from the number one hundred'

Prior to that, the wording was as follows: 'The name is derived from the number one hundred'

The Finnish etymologist and researcher Kustaa Vilkuna has suggested in his book "Kihlakunta ja häävuode" (Otava 1964) that the "kihla" part in the word "kihlakunta" be derived from Germanic word "Geisel" meaning "hostage".

As a native Finnish speaker I find it very hard to believe that "kihlakunta" could possibly be derived from the number 100, which is "sata" in Finnish.

I'm very skeptical as to whether you could actually verify your claim. Unless you can cite some sources, please revert it.

Garrulus carelicus (talk) 19:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)



Dear St.Trond!

Thank you for your rapid response.
I'm sure your command of Norwegian far exceeds mine. I happily agree with you on the origins of the Norwegian word "herred".
However, it still remains obscure to me, how your including the Finnish word "kihlakunta" in the original sentence ('The name is derived from the number one hundred') clarifies that the particular Norwegian word doesn't have its roots in the numeral "hundred".
I reverted the sentence in question back to as it where before. As I have not inserted any words to the article, I'm not quite sure what you are referring to with "I left your word were I found it. It would however be interesting to hear what the meaning of it is."
Do you mean "kihlakunta"? Kunta is, to my knowledge, an old Finnic word meaning any corporation with a known, fixed membership. The principal meaning in modern day Finnish is "municipality". Kihla has its roots in the old German word "Geisel" which means hostage.
Citing the English Wikipedia article "Hostage":
"The original definition of "hostage" meant that this (hostage) was handed over by one of two belligerent parties to the other or seized as security for the carrying out of an agreement, or as a preventive measure against certain acts of war."
The Finnish Linguist K. Vilkuna suggests that "kihlakunta" carries that meaning. It refers to the area from which a hostage was taken in order to secure the collection of taxes from that particular area. More precisely, the hostage was the offspring of the ruler or some other high-ranking nobleman of a conquered area. This was the common practice in the feudal medieval Europe with its host of petty kingdoms and principalities.
Btw, modern Finnish usage of "kihlat" means "engagement (to be married)". This comes from the original meaning "pledge, pawn" meaning something as a security for an agreement. The proposer gives the engagement ring to the proposee as a token or security that the promise of getting married be carried out.

tuus, Garrulus carelicus (talk) 11:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Infidel[edit]

Please quote a verifiable, reputable tertiary analysis for primary sources, such as the Quran, Bible etc. rather than a direct citation with a claim to what it purports to mean. An editors personal reading or understanding falls afoul of WP:OR.

I am not quite sure what you are trying to say or what hypothesis you are even formulating. I note you mentioned something about "balance" if you could enlighten me on what is missing or unbalanced I could help you formulate a valid entry. Currently the only reason your material is being removed is because they are so very left field with citations to not match the claims they are attributed to. If this can be corrected then the claims can be validly included.

cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.227.48.193 (talk) 10:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

February 2010[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Islam, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Supertouch (talk) 13:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Still keep us religious guys honest I see. The word "a" is probably better than "the". Cheers - Ret.Prof (talk) 13:50, 6 February 2011 (UTC) - PS Criticism of the Bible could use some work if you have the time.

February 2011[edit]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to [[:Racism]]. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Wiqixtalk 02:06, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Qur'an. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Wiqixtalk 14:52, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

July 2011[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Lutheranism. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Cognate247 (talk) 14:26, 28 July 2011 (UTC)