User talk:Taksen

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

Benedetto Marcello[edit]

Hello, could you perhaps translate the "Werke" section from the German Wikipedia's article about Benedetto Marcello to English? I think that would be a far more productive course of action than listing the individual works like you did in the edits that I've reverted. Graham87 10:32, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

  • It seems to me Wikipedia is not about the truth, but who is the leading wolf. It is not anymore by cooperating. Taksen (talk) 13:04, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
    • See my response on the talk page of the Marcello article. Graham87 15:22, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Unacceptable behaviour[edit]

You did not ask my permission to move my comments on my talk page to the article talk page. I consider that highly offensive behaviour and all the comments have now been removed from the article's talk page. Do not try anything like this again ~ it is totally unacceptable!!! Afterwriting (talk) 06:24, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Discussions about the content or style of an article should be on the talkpage, and not at a userpage. I asked you in the beginning to explain your clarifications on the talkpage, now it is somewhere on your userpage. It is obvious you like to hurt instead of asking yourself if you did the right thing. Taksen (talk) 07:43, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Taksen (talk) 07:51, 14 January 2014 (UTC) Your talkpage is almost empty and there is no archive. Nobody can see with whom or about you were discussing. It seems this "fight" will go on for the next few days and I suppose it is better to move the article to my website and go on there. The whole world knows when it is winter here, it is Summer in Australia, and I was not aware, this is a problem for some Wikipedians. Taksen (talk) 08:24, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Alexander Protopopov[edit]

Hello Taksen - I have just posted a slightly grumpy revert to your addition to the Protopopov article. Done in haste - sorry about the wording. I just wanted to make the point that while Protopopov was a disaster as a minister (and probably bore even greater responsibility than Rasputin for discrediting the regime) some of the expressions use could be toned down a little. Was he really mentally ill or just a foolish and bungling politician? Did he really favor total oppression - sounds a bit like reverting to the days of Ivan the Terrible. Were the Tsarist secret police really still dreaded in their final days - or just inept and ineffectual? Please repost the passage but possibly in more neutral terms. Regards Buistr (talk) 22:49, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Chevalier de Saint-Georges, your comments on Feb 26 on talk[edit]

Dear Taksen,

I am Gabriel Banat, author of “The Chevalier de Saint-Georges, virtuoso of the sword and the bow” (Pendragon Press, 2006). It was my wife and I who, shocked by the original Wikipedia allowing the original article riddled with errors about the subject of my book, felt obliged to write our own, only to find it stripped of most of its illustrations reproduced in that volume, even two pages taken from my own edition, “Masters of the Violin” (volume III, Johnson Reprint, 1982) devoted to facsimiles of first editions of Saint-Georges’ works, whose copyrights, the same as all of the others, I have secured before publishing.

Touched by your response to that astonishing act, we would like offer you, should you not own it, an inscribed volume of my Saint-Georges bio. If interested you may want to check out my website: It has excerpts from reviews of the book, including one from The New York Review of Books, and my performances, live, of two of Saint-Georges’ works. Dsteveb (talk) 16:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014[edit]

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically Chevalier de Saint-George, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth (talk) 18:27, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

  • There is no living person involved. Secondly, you understood in between Banat uploaded the pictures himself. A law case is not very likely. This discussion belongs to talk page of the Chevalier, not here.Taksen (talk) 18:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Honestly wikipedia's m:Mission is to provide free content. Just because an author wants to display their work doesnt mean we can accept it. If it is released under a free license thats one thing, but as it is there are major issues involved. Werieth (talk) 18:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

  • You should offer him help, he is famous musician and an expert on the violin, not on uploading pictures.Taksen 19:03, 26 February 2014 (UTC) Can you give me an example of an 18-century picture that caused problems? There would be no lawyer interested in a case.Taksen (talk) 19:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Taksen, Thank you for trying, but we are working out a deal with Wiki about the copyrights. All the pictures will get back on, and my husband only wants his there. Dsteveb (talk) 19:47, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Of course, but I hate to see long section and lines without any pictures. Yours were more interesting and mine can be removed anytime.


'peasant' connotes an agricultural worker on land not owned by them - Rasputin's occupation did not fit this description. There was no reference in that field either which weakens the argument for it being there - I was simply removing unsourced, inaccurate, dubious content. KingHiggins (talk) 21:48, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Grigori Rasputin was a peasant longer than any other of the professions mentioned. In Russia he was considered as a Siberian muzhik. Your "view" is incorrect.Taksen (talk) 21:56, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

So your "view" is that Grigori Rasputin was:

a poor smallholder or agricultural labourer of low social status (chiefly in historical use or with reference to subsistence farming in poorer countries)

and that this is one of the most notable things about him as a historical figure? Please, explain. KingHiggins (talk) 22:03, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Which book(s) on Rasputin did you read? [1]Taksen (talk) 06:27, 13 March 2014 (UTC)


Rasputin in his salon among admirers; his father (the 4th from the right) in early 1914, photo by Karl Bulla

:It appears you have failed to take note of Hafspajen's message. Telling someone to "go someplace else" as you did in Grigori Rasputin's edit summary is not helpful. Reverting an edit that removed two old, useless comments is not prudent and you gave no reason why they should stay. Looking at your talk page, you need to realize that you have to work with others. Bgwhite (talk) 21:30, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Part of the article is a sort of archive for me. There is information invisible for the reader which could be used in other articles. The messages M. deleted could be important one day. For now I put them here.
  • What is the use of deleting something that is invisible? Love of interference? For me M. crossed a line. M. goes almost everywhere to clean up. It cannot be an insult.
  • Some people are more interested in information than in collaboration. For others sometimes difficult to understand .Taksen (talk) 04:12, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

August 2014[edit]

Information icon Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Napoleon. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Alex2006 (talk) 06:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


as User:Rjensen and myself wrote on the edit summaries of our reverts, before you finish your edits on Napoleon, it would be helpful that you explain on the talk page the opportunity of inserting such information on a general article about the French Emperor. Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 06:43, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Man Writing a Letter[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:02, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

My apologies for the belated notification. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:12, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Woman Reading a Letter[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:02, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

My apologies for the belated notification. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:12, 14 October 2014 (UTC)


Change to more flexible gallery allowing for different sizes - if you don't like it revert it - just a suggestion. Hafspajen (talk) 13:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

your edit summary, AGF?[edit]

Re diff, did I claim page # was unnecessary? AGF? maybe an oversight, not sure. Note that I did reformat another ref around the same time preserving page #. --Jeremyb (talk) 07:00, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the information and the message. I did not know Liedte died. He was very precise; and this book is extensive.Taksen (talk) 07:18, 6 February 2015 (UTC)


Taksen, witch one is the one that is correct? Original, Alt 1 or Alt 2. You know, they are all on the museum's webbsites... the original too.... Kinda confusing. Hafspajen (talk) 20:18, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

This is Alt 1 also from the museum... Hafspajen (talk) 20:20, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alfred Stopford, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cartier and Rector (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Albert Stopford at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 11:14, 27 February 2015 (UTC)