Sabine Cretella wrote:
> This is a general question - did I mention your name?
>
> And as I said before: I am not going to discuss things again - I am
> already in contact with some Palttdüütsch authors that publish
> liteature and articles in low saxon. There are more than just some
> writings.
You are going the Node way now? Everytime someone discusses something
with him he comes up with these mysterious off-wiki "experts" who he
quotes. I really would like it if you could solve it with the people who
are on-wiki if there is a problem. They are the people you work together
with. They ARE the community within wikimedia. Not some outsiders who
feel having to comment but not work together is a great thing to do.
And yes you DO need to discuss things things with fellow wikimedians.
They are the ones you work with, not some John Doe's
> Who is taking things from private to public is not me. On nds you can
> do whatever you want as long as the community supports you. You can
> use Werner's list as long as it is according to GFDL and he is
> mentioned as the author. I am going down to the basis as I don't like
> to go ahead by "xyz told me".
You are telling him that also. XYZ told me .....
>
>
> I am going ahead with universities, writers and the institute for
> lower saxon language I suppose this should be fine when it comes to
> credibility - and this is what you are trying to destroy - and I
> really don't like that.
He is not destroying anything. These outsiders are welcome to discuss
this themselves. I always hate discussion by proxy. and when people come
up with all kinds of mysterious friends to which others have to bow
because of their "alleged" expertise.
> On the one word you told me by e-mail that was a hundred percent error
> turned out to be used 186 times on the internet (I have a screenshot
> of google if you don't believe it) and I found the writer who used it
> in her texts - she's a reporter for a newspaper in North Germany and
> has been writing articles in Pattdüütsch vor over 13 years for them
> now. I also contacted her to ask her how to categorise her writings.
Another mysterious supporting source.
> So: anything is out of discussion here. I am not going let me impose
> things by anyone, I prefer research and adapt the contents we have to
> that..
And Heiko is not going to let you impose things upon him. Editwar anyone?
> Remeber: it is not a nice thing to take things to public only since
> you presume I was talking about you -
It is not a nice thing to ask community help and only paint half of the
picture, if you take things public name him/her so they got a chance to
present their side of the argument. It has been done to me a couple of
times by another wiktionarian and close friend of yours.
> I did not once mention your name and what I had/still have is a
> general question - it does not happen the first time that people know
> how to improve things, but just complain about others not doing as the
> writer supposes - and talking about wikis: this is not the way to go
> and that's it. It is a very general question. If you need proofs for
> that: they are there in the histories.
If someone contents something you should listen to them and go in a
discussion. Not just boldly go on and add the stuff elsewhere!
Ciao,
Waerth/Walter