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

Kosebamse on Wikipedia[edit]

Bradypus.jpg This user is a WikiSloth.
de Dieser Benutzer spricht Deutsch als Muttersprache.
en-4 This user can contribute with a near-native level of English.
sv-2 Denna användare har kunskaper på mellannivå i svenska.
no-1 Denne brukeren/brukaren kan litt norsk.
Search user languages

I am a German with a Norwegian username and a focus on the English Wikipedia, where I have also been an admin from mid-2003 until 7 February 2006 (see below). Technically still active, but nowadays slowed down to the point of invisibility, part out of disillusionment about Wikipedia's inability to honor professional knowledge and writing ability, part out of real life commitments.

I wish to keep personal details out of Wikipedia. If you know me in real life, please respect my desire for privacy and keep that knowledge out of the Internet. Thanks. (If you need to contact me privately, please e-mail me through the link on my user page.)

As a concession to the perennial anagram mania, be it known that "Kosebamse" is equivalent to: "Meek Basso" (which seems to characterize me in a way), "Be As Smoke", "Smoke Base", as well as a lot of other nonsense.


I usually adhere to a one-revert-rule. I do sometimes revert other peoples' contributions, but normally try not to re-revert except in cases of obvious vandalism.


I am a moderate deletionist. Otherwise, I try to keep wiki-ideologically neutral, and when in doubt, err on the side of common sense. Not so Wikipedia-specific attitudes that I am inclined to subscribe to: existentialism, skepticism, Zen, Old European (and proudly so), and common sense.


I already have three mottos on my user page, but if I were to add another one, it would be something along the lines of "When you write an encyclopedia, consider the reader's needs, not your own."

My law[edit]

I have had the honor to phrase a possibly significant observation about the social dynamics of Wikipedia. See User:Raul654/Raul's laws (# 10).

Admin? No thanks.[edit]

I have requested removal of my admin status on the English Wikipedia, which I have held for about two and a half years. The reason is that I thoroughly disagree with the ways of the community these days, particularly the excessive legalistic nitpicking that has replaced good will and common sense. It is my belief that these developments result from a failure to adhere to a few basic principles:

  • to be open and warmly welcoming, not insular,
  • to be focused singlemindedly on writing an encyclopedia, not on Usenet-style debate,
  • to recognize and praise the best work, work that is detailed, factual, well-informed, and well-referenced,
  • to work to understand what neutrality requires and why it is so essential to and good for this project,
  • to treat your fellow productive, well-meaning members of Wikipedia with respect and good will,
  • to attract and honor good people who know a lot and can write about it well, and
  • to show the door to trolls, vandals, and wiki-anarchists, who if permitted would waste your time and create a poisonous atmosphere here.

Which is what Larry Sanger wrote in his farewell message in 2002, and which is as true today as it was then; the only slight amendment that I would add to adapt his message to 2006 would be a reference to bureaucratic minds obsessed with process instead of content.

I will continue to contribute to the encyclopedia, but I don't want to be perceived as one who identifies with the ways of the madhouse.


My userpage has been vandalised at least seven times until now. I consider that an accumulation of compliments by people who wish to acknowledge my decent attitude.

Civilised dispute illustrated[edit]

Illustration of various aspects of civilised dispute resolution. Center, two Wikipedians talking politely over a factual disagreement. Left, representatives of the arbitration committee gathering evidence. Background right, a group of Wikipedians calmly discussing the relevance of a reference in a teletubby article. The winged figure in the background remains yet to be identified. A representative of Wikipediareview perhaps?


Kosebamse privately[edit]

Works I hope to see published during my lifetime[edit]

Weep o mine eyes[edit]

Great Wikipedia moments[edit]

Kicking the bucket in the high arctic[edit]

From User talk:Bishonen:

Ballooon landing on main page[edit]

Well! well! well! What a surprise! Congratulations. Giano | talk 06:19, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

  • No as a matter of fact I did not! allthough I was going to. Very intelligent human beings such as Raul and myself though can comminicate by telepathy, so I will take the credit for it being there just the same. Have you removed the pretentious text though? "Gently slipped away, guided by angels, into a better world" is the way I would express it Giano | talk 12:49, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
You do realize the pretentiousness comes in the very first sentence, and will thus appear ON the Main Page itself? I you want to change it, you'll have to do it here, not just in the article text. Oh, I forgot, you can't, can you? Upcoming Main Page text is protected. Only us admins can edit it. And, let me see, you aren't one, are you? <cough>MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA<cough>. Bishonen | talk 10:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC).
Don't worry I'm sure one of your peers like Orane would do it for me. Giano | talk 12:49, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations and best wishes for the article being on main page, and all the attention that brings. Perhaps "lost the fight, epic and enduring, as all must in the end, against that most bitter of enemies, foe to joy, widow's grief and orphan's warder, death?" Or, to make the expert editor happy, "Kicked the bucket." In fact, I think, "Andree kicked the bucket on White's Island in 1897" will be great. Geogre 12:12, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
I liked the first one better, however "lost the fight" just doesn't strike the right note, does it? Perhaps "succumbed to pitiless cruelties of nature" would be more apt? Note the poetic overblown redundancy! KillerChihuahua?!? 12:54, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Apt schmapt. I declare we have a consensus for croaked. Bishonen Tulipface spin.gif talk 14:15, 11 April 2006 (UTC).
I'm not sure. How about " which all three expedition members labored in futility to push up the daisies that (alas!) would never bloom in their cruel arctic graveyard." —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
  • .....when their last soft breath was lost on the glacial breeze which enshrinined them for eternity in their sarcophagi of ice. Giano | talk 17:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
    • "...then did Fama, with her mournful trumpet sound the passing of these noble men and valiant heroes." Geogre 17:08, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
      • and the world was then still, as only sobbing sounded across the frozen tundra Giano | talk 17:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
        • Um, given the frigid fate of our three heroes, who was sobbing exactly? The polar bears? I think not - they would have been most relieved. Perhaps "...and the world was then still, the silence broken only by the gentle sighing of the Hyperborean air, the groaning of the ice, and the padding of polar bears." -- ALoan (Talk) 18:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Forgive him.....he is British..they have no romance in their souls, they see not the beauty in having their bolox frozen off. Giano | talk 19:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

The horrors[edit]

From User talk:Scientizzle

Dear Vile Anathema:

I am here to offer puerile, yet amazingly accurate, statements about your parenthood, personal hygiene, intelligence and/or sexual practices. For your breakage of the Wikipedia caused me, for several fraught moments, to be without guidance as to which band is teh suxx, who is uber-ghey, and which celebrities, both male and female, suffer from firecrotch. Additionally, I was unable at a crucial moment to accurately articulate which variety of Pokemon spawns the "Wigglytuff" The vacuum created in my life by the absence of this information caused me to experience an utter breakdown, during which I spoke in polysyllabic words and manifested unwanted signs of intelligence. You are personally responsible for this horror, and I fully intend to bill you, in full, for the cost of the necessary therapy and medications which will be required for me to recover from this highly-traumatic incident. Did no one ever tell you it's not nice to break the intarweb?

You, sir, are full of lose and pleh. May ducks roost uneasily in your underthings. Insincerely, Gladys J Cortez 01:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

PS: Troutslap!

This is my favorite response so far...Thanks! — Scientizzle 01:39, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I am panting with relief at the information which you were so kind as to impart to me on my talk page. (Also: yAy! i GOt my 1irsT B@RnST@r!!!!! (Ok, actually that looks like " my first PORNSTAR", which...You know, that would be almost as good. Almost. :) )) Fer serious, d00d...thanks! Gladys J Cortez 02:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Sir, I salute you, and hereby offer to bronze what's left of the trout once everyone, including myself, gets their whack at you. I laughed really loudly and long at the AN/I on all this. total Awesomeness! ThuranX (talk) 02:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


Definition of scientific theory in a nutshell[edit]

From Intelligent design:

"This presents a demarcation problem, which in the philosophy of science, is about how and where to draw the lines around science. For a theory to qualify as scientific it must be:

  • Consistent (internally and externally)
  • Parsimonious (sparing in proposed entities or explanations, see Occam's Razor)
  • Useful (describes and explains observed phenomena)
  • Empirically testable & falsifiable (see Falsifiability)
  • Based upon controlled, repeated experiments
  • Correctable & dynamic (changes are made as new data is discovered)
  • Progressive (achieves all that previous theories have and more)
  • Tentative (admits that it might not be correct rather than asserting certainty)

For any theory, hypothesis or conjecture to be considered scientific, it must meet at least most, but ideally all, of the above criteria. The fewer which are matched, the less scientific it is; and if it meets only a couple or none at all, then it cannot be treated as scientific in any meaningful sense of the word."

Miscellanea, random stuff, nonsense[edit]

Proceed at your own risk. Don't try to take anything here too serious.

Predictions about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows[edit]


...and I have been a part of it: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bulbasaur

More miscellanea[edit]