User talk:Skäpperöd: Difference between revisions
→Re: Some straight talk here. |
|||
Line 378: | Line 378: | ||
I do not know what you mean by giving [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests&diff=350431577&oldid=350395388 this diff]. Who clarified me what? Which policies are you talking about? Could you please provide any links? Thank you.[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] ([[User talk:Biophys|talk]]) 18:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
I do not know what you mean by giving [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests&diff=350431577&oldid=350395388 this diff]. Who clarified me what? Which policies are you talking about? Could you please provide any links? Thank you.[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] ([[User talk:Biophys|talk]]) 18:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
:Thank you for pointing that out, of course it was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:EEML#Meatpuppetry here]. [[User:Skäpperöd|Skäpperöd]] ([[User talk:Skäpperöd#top|talk]]) 06:10, 18 March 2010 (UTC) |
:Thank you for pointing that out, of course it was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:EEML#Meatpuppetry here]. [[User:Skäpperöd|Skäpperöd]] ([[User talk:Skäpperöd#top|talk]]) 06:10, 18 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
::Yes, I saw and understand what you mean. Being "proxy" or "meatpuppet" means doing something ''exactly'' as someone else asked you. I did do that. I made only such changes (with my corrections) I would like to make myself. In a number cases I did not even touch an article because I disagreed with ''all'' changes he suggested.[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] ([[User talk:Biophys|talk]]) 22:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::I also had to respond to your other accusations instead of doing my work. Why are you doing this? We never had any disputes with you, I never mentioned you in emails, and I voted on your side because I happened to disagree with Piotrus. I do not vote like Piotrus just because he is my friend, just as I do not make all changes like Hanzo just because he is my friend.[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] ([[User talk:Biophys|talk]]) 22:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:26, 18 March 2010
Contents |
---|
DYK for Swedish Wars on Bremen
Materialscientist (talk) 11:42, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Gustavia, Rügen
⇌ Jake Wartenberg 19:42, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Vorpommern
Mea culpa. Lfh (talk) 16:58, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- No problem. Could you check the stress at Saarbrücken too? It was placed on two syllables, so I removed the second, but maybe I should have removed the first. Lfh (talk) 17:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Expulsion of Germans after World War II
I have soft-protected Expulsion of Germans after World War II to allow for more discussion on the talk page before further large changes are made to the article. This allows for established users to edit the page, but not anonymous IPs, so that this does not become an edit war. Cheers --BaronLarf 19:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Relax
I did not call anybody a Neo-Nazi. You have no cause for complaint.--Woogie10w (talk) 19:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, why keep him there? The mention of the IHR stinks like a dead fish in the sun.--Woogie10w (talk) 23:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
- Note well my earlier comments The current article is poorly written and sorely needs a lot of cleanup work. Over the years this article has become a hodgepodge of edits by editors who acted in good faith but unfortunately lack historical expertise. Overall my POV is sympathetic to the plight of the German civilian population who became the victims of the expulsions. The historical facts need to be narrated in a credible scholarly article rather than the current disjointed, poorly written mess that exists at this time--Woogie10w (talk) 23:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
- The article is your baby, let me read the The New Cambridge Medieval History[1]--Woogie10w (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Happy Skäpperöd's Day!
![]() |
User:Skäpperöd has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Peace, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:46, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
- Humph! He completely misled me with his photos of unblemished hollyhocks. Shameful. Novickas (talk) 03:56, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! You made my snowed-in day! Skäpperöd (talk) 09:37, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Brotbackautomat.
Wir haben frisches Brot, Schnee oder kein Schnee. Wir Haben ein Brotbackautomat. [2]--Woogie10w (talk) 13:13, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Ecktes Brot
Weizenmehl-2 tassen(US)
Vollkornweizenmehl-1/4 tasse (US)
Roggenmehl-1/4 tasse (US)
Milchpulver- 1 tablespoon (15 milliliters)
Olivenöl 1 tablespoon (15 milliliters)
Salz-1 teaspoon (5 milliliters)
brauner Zucker-2 tablespoons (30 milliliters)
Wasser-1 tasse (US)
Backhefe-1 teaspoon 5 (milliliters)
backen vier Stunden--Woogie10w (talk) 21:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
Tylman AfD
Your editorial comments are unhelpful, unnecessary, and serve no purpose other than to create a hostile atmosphere. If User:Paweł5586 should not have commented, let the blocking admin remove his comment. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 07:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Please stop trying to turn this AfD into a battleground. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 07:26, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
(response)
DYK for Peace of Travendal
Materialscientist (talk) 12:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
History of Poland
There are missing references because I haven't finished this big "Decline of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth" section yet. I get most of the development from the "Historia Polski 1505-1764" book by Gierowski, it's listed there, an old Jagiellonian University text. Then I check some other sources, add information, do references. This process is basically complete as far as I'm concerned up to the "Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth" portion, so any corrections, additions, additional references would be best to put into this "finished" part. This current "Decline" part it is probably best to leave till I'm done with it. Other that that I appreciate contributions and involvement. For example I rarely add internet references, which I suppose should become increasingly available as the network encompasses more and more things. Thank for your interest and constructive input. Orczar (talk) 15:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Tylman AfD
I'm relieved to hear you didn't take offense. Looking back, I realized that I made my comment right after you, and I used the word "you". Thanks. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:27, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Siege of Stralsund (1711–1715)
Materialscientist (talk) 18:00, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Siege of Tönning
Materialscientist (talk) 18:00, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Poznań
Hi Skapperod, I would appreciate if you would stop POV pushing on Polish cities. Thank you. Dr. Loosmark 22:38, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- ?Skäpperöd (talk) 22:39, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- You know very well what I mean. I request you give us a quote of the relevant text from the source on the article's talk page. Dr. Loosmark 00:09, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
[3] Skäpperöd (talk) 07:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- How does "Also in Poland and Bohemia were the burghers in the towns initially primarily of German origin" support your claim that the "German settlers constituted the majority in Polish towns of that time"!? Please remove your nonsensical claim. Dr. Loosmark 12:07, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Maybe my translation is slightly ambiguous (though I don't think so), but I had also quoted the original. "Überwiegend", which I translated as "primarily", means primarily in the sense of constituting a majority, but "primarily of German origin" and "German majority" are imho redundant anyways. Please also avoid aggressive terms like "POV pushing" and "nonsensical claim" when talking to me. Skäpperöd (talk) 17:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Initially (soon after the Mongol invasion - at a single point in time) primarily of German origin is quite different from "constituted a majority of Polish towns at that time". Please stop pushing your POV. Dr. Loosmark 18:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
No, "initially" refers to the Ostsiedlung = founding period of these towns, I wonder why you associate the Mongols with that quote? Sure that was the same time period, and there was a feedback-loop on Ostsiedlung, but that was primarily in Lesser Poland and Silesia. Anyhow, the paragraph from which the quote is derived does not mention the Mongols, it deals exclusively with the founding of towns during the Ostsiedlung. I am sorry to see that you won't tone down your aggressive language. Skäpperöd (talk) 18:53, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Two things 1) These towns = which towns? 2) What exactly is meant by "founding period"? I hope you are not claiming that these towns had a German majority at the time where they were founded. PS please don't make bogus accusations of aggressive language. Dr. Loosmark 10:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- The Cambridge History of Poland Vol 1 supports Skäpperöd's POV--Woogie10w (talk) 18:57, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Arbeiterbewegung in Pommern
Maybe you are interested in this [4] [5]. Viele Grüße HerkusMonte (talk) 19:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you, I just skimmed through it and will look at it more closely as time permits. Skäpperöd (talk) 19:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Thx
Thanks for improving my articles. My writting english is not good but I am trying my best (Meost (talk) 20:03, 26 January 2010 (UTC))
Wikiout
First Annual Wikiout. In order to give our vandalism, new page and spam patrollers a well deserved day off, it is suggested that all edit patrollers take a 1 day vacation from editing Wikipedia, on Thursday, April 1, 2010. (No, this is NOT an April Fools Joke) Go out, enjoy the spring weather, and give your wrist a break from using that mouse! Please pass this message along to other patrollers by adding {{subst:User:Wuhwuzdat/Wikiout}} ~~~~ to their talk pages |
WuhWuzDat 17:39, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi Skäpperöd. I see you noticed my decline of your speedy tagging on RSOE EDIS - I would have notified you but you got there first. After looking over the article a bit in the process of trying to find sources I decided it qualifies as unambiguous promotion and deleted it anyway. Cheers, Olaf Davis (talk) 19:35, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Lorenz Schwietz
The DYK project (nominate) 18:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Nomination of German-Japanese relations
Hi there. Over the past weeks I majorly expanded the article on German-Japanese relations and really need people to go scan my contributions. I want to set a high quality standard since I'd love to have it featured some day. I'd really appreciate your participation on its nomination for a Good Article at Talk:German–Japanese relations. Thanks in advance! --Gliese876 (talk) 11:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- I think I've dealt with every missing citation ;) --Gliese876 (talk) 17:57, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Europa regina
The DYK project (nominate) 12:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
- I have never seen, heard of, or imagined this before. Thanks very much for bringing this article to Wikipedia! --Griseum (talk) 15:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
- You are welcome. Allegories of Europe are not well covered on wikipedia yet, except for the Greek myth (but not its Early Modern adaptations, as far as I am aware). If you are interested, take a look at this map, where Europa regina actually left the map and becomes pure allegory, as an Europa triumphans. Best Skäpperöd (talk) 16:35, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Hoop crown
The DYK project (nominate) 12:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Capitulation of Estonia and Livonia
Materialscientist (talk) 12:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Treaty of Königsberg (1656)
Ucucha 18:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Treaty of Labiau
Ucucha 18:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Polish Requiem
Thank you for helping me translate on the DYK nomination for Polish Requiem. I try to keep Sunday offline, smile. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:46, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
- Proposal to Close This RfC
- Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy
Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 03:27, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
New message
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg/40px-Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg.png)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
New message
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg/40px-Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg.png)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
DYK for Treaty of Bromberg
Materialscientist (talk) 06:12, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Das Erbe
Materialscientist (talk) 12:04, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
RfC
There is a request for comment happening here: Talk:Evangelische_Kirche_in_Deutschland#Recent_move
Perhaps you'd like to give your opinion on the matter. Mootros (talk) 20:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Peace of Lund
—Ed (talk • majestic titan) 00:33, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
EKD
I just wonder why you put a hypen for the Hanover and former Thuringian EKD church. --Mk4711 (talk) 21:53, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I just copied the names from the EKD site, and they have a hyphen there. The German name of these two churches is also spelled with a hyphen. Best Skäpperöd (talk) 06:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Treaty of Narva
Calmer Waters 06:03, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Treaty of Warsaw (1705)
Calmer Waters 06:03, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Municipality Treptower Deep
Hi. Can I ask You for the source of List of municipalities in the Province of Pomerania, A-H? Thank You JDavid (talk) 17:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- these lists I took from de.wiki, sources are any pre-1945 atlas compared to a post-1945 atlas I guess. Best Skäpperöd (talk) 20:59, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Treaty of Altranstädt (1706)
Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Treaty of Thorn (1709)
Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Second Northern War
Do you consider nominating Second Northern War for the WP:GAC. I think it has all the chances becoming good article.M.K. (talk) 19:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you, but I don't think it is ready for GA yet. Though Frost is a good source, the article needs more sources and cross-references. Furthermore, I only gave a major outline ofthe war's course, and several issues are missing. Eg
- the establishment of the "most absolute absolutism ever" in Denmark as a consequence of the war, precedent for similar events in Sweden two decades later;
- the issue of Scania and adjacent provinces, for which the dices finally fell in favor of Sweden (change of conciousness in the population? Snapphaner? Demography? Feudal land ownership? Dano-Swedish transition in the Lund church province? etc pp);
- demography in PL-LIT, eg population drop, Catholic/victim identity in Poland, the legendary atrocities against Jews and other non-Catholic minorities in Poland following the Polish recovery, consequences of Ashkenazi permanent resettlement in Western Europe and return of Jews who fled to Germany following their post-war rehabilitation by the Polish king etc pp;
- the role of the Maritime Powers and (most important) France in negotiating and guaranting the peace;
- in this context also: the Sound and its international importance, Denmark's crisis and role as an unattractive ally, that she was ignored in the peace to a degree that only its imminent annihilation was prevented, consequences for Holstein-Gottorp's orientation towards Sweden;
- transformation of Brandenburg-Prussia from a minor European player to a medium power with the foundations laid to become the dominant power in northern Central Europe;
- the beginning transformation and internal disputes in Russia - why the tsardom despite its manpower and initial gains was exhausted so soon that its role in respect to Sweden was indecisive, maybe an excursus to the cossack situation/boyars/tartars, the envisioned and failed Polish succession;
- transformation of PL-LIT from a potent player in EE to anarchist booty grounds;
- devastation of Prussia, Pomerania, Poland - bellum se ipsum alet vs scorched earth
- short characterization of the fighting armies - composition? pay? trained? leadership? loyalty? etc pp.
- Lithuanian-Polish relations - pro-commonwealth and separatist attitudes of which Lithuanian nobles/families, formation, characterization and dissolution of the Swedish-Lithuanian union
- characterization of the most important leaders besides the kings, eg Magnus de la Gardie;
- Partial reduktioner in Sweden, impact of the war (or the envisioned booty) on the acceptance of this measure by the nobles, net benefit reduktion/war costs for Karl X Gustaf and Karl XI and impact on the latters full-scale reduktion lateron.
- The concept of the dominium maris baltici, importance/net benefit of fortifications at the mouths of the important rivers/hinterland holdings, the respective rivalries between the big players, stance of the locals
- At least, those are the issues that I still miss and there are probably more. The other "Northern Wars" articles are also not in a satisfactory state, the worst atm being imho the Livonian War article which I have not yet expanded. What I did during the last months is creating some kind of a basic coverage of the most important wars and treaties (and some battles I have interest in, though I like treaties more), and frankly that is (and will be) very time consuming already as I try to not write from memory, but only from cited sources. So I can't promise you that the issues above will be adressed in the near future. Another handicap regarding GA/FA status is my unfamiliarity with (and to some degree dislike for) the respective MOS requirements and the corresponding wiki bureaucracy, and I kind of lack the motivation to get into that. Best Skäpperöd (talk) 10:10, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
- Well, the most of those improvements are for the WP:FA status. I think GA would sail with this edition with few improvements suggested by reviewer. M.K. (talk) 10:07, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hm, you seem to have more experience than me (zero) with GAC, so if you really think it will pass, why not give it a try. Best Skäpperöd (talk) 15:12, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- I will nominate it. Few quick tips - it is not good then one sentence makes a single paragraph, plus bullets should be converted to smth (for example a table; with treaties case). M.K. (talk) 22:13, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hm, you seem to have more experience than me (zero) with GAC, so if you really think it will pass, why not give it a try. Best Skäpperöd (talk) 15:12, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Well, the most of those improvements are for the WP:FA status. I think GA would sail with this edition with few improvements suggested by reviewer. M.K. (talk) 10:07, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Treaty of Altranstädt (1707)
Calmer Waters 00:05, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Kartouwe
Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Hitler Youth Quex
Hello! Your submission of Hitler Youth Quex 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! Storye book (talk) 16:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Response is here. Best Skäpperöd (talk) 17:02, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Excellent. Please could you repeat the hook in the article header, with online citation using the same link? When you've done that, please let me know and I'll give the nom a green tick. But please note that this is my first week of DYK reviewing (my response to the reviewing backlog), and I've requested an administrator to check my work. Hope that's OK.--Storye book (talk) 17:15, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- I did, but I am also fine with being AGF'ed ;) Best Skäpperöd (talk) 17:40, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. Review updated.--Storye book (talk) 17:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- I did, but I am also fine with being AGF'ed ;) Best Skäpperöd (talk) 17:40, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Excellent. Please could you repeat the hook in the article header, with online citation using the same link? When you've done that, please let me know and I'll give the nom a green tick. But please note that this is my first week of DYK reviewing (my response to the reviewing backlog), and I've requested an administrator to check my work. Hope that's OK.--Storye book (talk) 17:15, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Re
I do not know what you mean by giving this diff. Who clarified me what? Which policies are you talking about? Could you please provide any links? Thank you.Biophys (talk) 18:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for pointing that out, of course it was here. Skäpperöd (talk) 06:10, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I saw and understand what you mean. Being "proxy" or "meatpuppet" means doing something exactly as someone else asked you. I did do that. I made only such changes (with my corrections) I would like to make myself. In a number cases I did not even touch an article because I disagreed with all changes he suggested.Biophys (talk) 22:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- I also had to respond to your other accusations instead of doing my work. Why are you doing this? We never had any disputes with you, I never mentioned you in emails, and I voted on your side because I happened to disagree with Piotrus. I do not vote like Piotrus just because he is my friend, just as I do not make all changes like Hanzo just because he is my friend.Biophys (talk) 22:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I saw and understand what you mean. Being "proxy" or "meatpuppet" means doing something exactly as someone else asked you. I did do that. I made only such changes (with my corrections) I would like to make myself. In a number cases I did not even touch an article because I disagreed with all changes he suggested.Biophys (talk) 22:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC)