User talk:Doom11

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of Contents

Department directory

Need help?

Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.

Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations
The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.

Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.

If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Good luck, and have fun. --SMS ^Talk 13:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources/Bach/Pachelbel

As you are well aware, content should be verifiable with citations to reliable sources. While you seem to consider them common knowledge among historians, your recent edits - and revert - to Johann Sebastian Bach and Johann Pachelbel, add information to articles which had previously been peer reviewed without the information you have added. If you can reliably reference your statements, please include them if you wish to put the information back. Thank you.--Technopat (talk) 12:47, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok, academical backround please ! ( some mus.educ. or hist. educ?) .--User:Doom11 (talk) 15:01, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The sources you have provided make NO reference whatsoever to "biological father". There is, however, a reference to "geistige Stammvater Bach" or the intellectual progenitor of Bach. I shall modify your edit accordingly. Please do NOT revert my edit, again. Thank you.--Technopat (talk) 13:06, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see - you don`t have ANY serious academical backround:) of course only DNA test is "the source".

Not a "biological father", but "probably biological father" as a version. I am historian.

Historians work with reliable sources - not "probablies" - or at least they do if they want to contribute to Wikipedia.--Technopat (talk) 13:33, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

you don`t have ANY serious academical backround:) "Historians work with reliable sources" is not language between professionals.

http://paulomtts.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/pachelbel.jpg

http://www.npj.com/thefaceofbach/AGP-DJB-det2a-wdheq-if-0300.jpg

.--User:Doom11 (talk) 15:44, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Johann Sebastian Bach, you will be blocked from editing. There exists no known portrait of Pachelbel. You're simply linking to another portrait of CPE Bach. No standard works on Pachelbel or Bach (e.g. Welter and Wolff) mention anything at all concerning the "possible biological father" view, and neither do any of the articles, dissertations, and books on Pachelbel and/or Bach that I know of. Please either provide reliable (i.e. not random websites) sources, or stop. --Jashiin (talk) 19:48, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

youre academical backround, please --User:Doom11 (talk) 21:53, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jashiin ! If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia you will be blocked from editing. --User:Doom11 (talk) 22:02, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2009

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Johann Sebastian Bach. ~ Arjun 19:55, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LAST WARNING: I CALL FLORIDA ! VANDALISM !

Reliable sources

Please read our Reliable Source policy. Thank you, Antandrus (talk) 20:04, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please read our Reliable Source policy. And of course - academical backround please. Thank you, User:Doom11 (talk) 22.10, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Lemme guess, you hail from Eatagoat University, Professor of Adhominism? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 21:11, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No dear , I know about books: Also, for a period of one year beginning in May 1677, the twenty-four-year-old Johann Pachelbel served the Eisenach capelle before he went on to Erfurt as organist of the Predigerkirche, where he succeeded Johann Bach (4). Pachelbel's short stay clearly left a mark on Ambrosius Bach's family, suggesting a close, cordial, and lasting friendship. In 1680, Pachelbel became godfather to Ambrosius's daughter Johanna Juditha (though he was unable to travel from Erfurt for the baptism) and in 1686 teacher and mentor of Ambrosius's son Johann Christoph, at whose Ohrdruf wedding in 1694 Pachelbel performed along with his friends among the extended Bach family (see Chapter 2). Johann Sebastian Bach:The Learned Musician.By CHRISTOPH WOLFF. W. W. Norton & Company, 2000. User:Doom11 (talk) 22.10, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

It's good to see you're no longer pushing the "Pachelbel is Bach's father" line. But everything else you add is already covered by the articles you edit. Pachelbel's mentions Ambrosius' daughter and Christoph's marriage; Bach's mentions the forbidden manuscript story. There is no need to add those things. --Jashiin (talk) 21:41, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake. I am not pushing the "Pachelbel is Bach's father" line. Only DNA test is a source in this case. All about probabilty -Pachelbel and Bach family, and of course Elizabeth Lämmerhirt Bach were very close, so close that Buttstett, Johann Pachelbel's most important pupil, married Martha Lämmerhirt, a cousin of Elizabeth Lämmerhirt Bach , in 1687 and etc.etc.etc User:Doom11 (talk) 00.02, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

AfD

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pratt–Romney family. BigJim707 (talk) 18:12, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]