OK Mark,
it is dangerous to feed the trolls, but there are some things that need to be sorted out.
Meaning, again, "I have no response to most of your assertions because they are probably correct, so I have ignored those and answered only those I have a good response for rather than conceding you are right".
Point C: No one cares if it's patentplatt, if they have a problem with it they will change it!
Noone cares if it's patentplatt? You obviously didn't read Point C -- Jonny Meinbohm and Ron Hahn __DO__ care. Ron tried to change it, but Heiko was as always very cold towards him and took a very uninviting stance, as usual, rather than welcoming in and being thankful for a native speaker as it should be.
- we are on a good way in nds.wikpedia.org. The flooding with low quality
articles has stopped. There has been a lot of cleanup, and recently some nice new articles were written.
"Katt" had been edited by Sarcelles just before Ron edited it. There is a difference between low-quality articles and poor-grammar articles -- someone who writes articles with bad grammar will not easily be able to fix it. Someone who makes low-quality articles, can easily fix it.
- I am interested in building up, but your intention is tearing down. I can
live
You are twisting the words in my mouth. "your intention is tearing down"... like all the pages I blanked? Oh wait, I didn't blank any pages! All the pages I proposed for deletion? Oh wait I didn't do that! Where do you get the idea that my "intention is tearing down"? My single concern about nds.wikipedia is quality. It has been pointed out by both Jonny Meinbohm and Ron Hahn that the entire Wikipedia -- not just large parts of it -- are written in Patentplatt, and I trust them both more than I trust you because 1) they are both native speakers and you are not and 2) I have known them longer, and 3) they are always kind and they do not say things like they will not allow that on THEIR Wikipedia!
with a certain abount of problems in nds.wikpedia.org and I prefer helping people instead of accusing them. The one user who wrote lots of low quality articles is doing a quite good job at the moment with edits where he has sufficient competence. I think you would just have kicked him out.
Again, you are twisting the words in my mouth. I don't mind about articles of poor quality, in that they need cleanup -- they exist on ALL Wikipedias. What I do mind is articles written in Patentplatt. According to Ron and Jonny, this is the vast majority or even all of the articles at nds.wiki.
- For the record: several of Ron's proposals are still kept in the current
article, this includes grammar fixes, choice of words, but it specifically EXCLUDES changes in spelling. The text originally came from Ron, but was
What is your point here? When you reverted me, each time in addition to the spelling changes you discarded about half of the changes in grammar and choice of words.
Please see http://nds.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Katt&diff=22196&oldid=220... http://nds.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Katt&diff=22047&oldid=220...
This is extremely arrogant considering that: 1) Platt is his native language, it is not yours and 2) In the second diff, perhaps you did not know it was made by a native speaker, but by the first one, you certainly knew it was from Ron Hahn.
made in anonymous edits. Anonymous edits are suspicious. We do have lots of trouble with anonymous spamming and (as said before) anonymous edits are living a dangerous life. Most of his changes were spelling, and these changes went against our spelling policy on nds. Therefore I took his article, and reverted the spelling changes. Even at that time I checked the grammar changes and kept some of them. Then you started a spelling war on nds. This I reverted. I
Some of them? You "checked the grammar changes"? Again, you are pretending that your Platt is better than Ron's. There is no good explanation for reverting so many grammar fixes made by a native speaker, when it isn't your native language.
will continue to do so, unless there is a broad consensus in nds to switch spelling.
When and where was the "broad consensus" on nds.wiki to use the older Sass spelling in the first place?? I searched for 15 minutes using Google, with terms like "sass", "schriefwies", "orthographie", etc. and yet I never did find a page where people voted on orthography.
(And besides: any further edit war by you on nds will be ansered with a swift blocking.)
Ahh, so you don't block people who flood "your" Wikipedia with poor-quality articles, but you DO block people who revert spelling? Hmm. That seems a bit hypocritical.
Ron's suggestions about grammar fixes will always be welcome. I liked his lowlands-l, but it has much too much traffic, and therefore I have unsubscribed from this list. I appreciate his experience in Low Saxon.
If you "appreciate his experience", then why did you revert some of his grammar fixes even AFTER you found out it was him??
We have been in contact concerning "Linux op platt", and he has helped us with several words about computers. If the first edit had not been anonymously, things might have been different.
- It's quite self-serving of you to say, "Well, they're officially
one language" just because you want them to have a single Wikipedia. I can't find very many pages that say "dutch low saxon":
OK, would you prefer to say "Plattdüütsch" and "Nedersaksisch", or would you still complain that "Nedersaksisch" should also include the area of "Niedersachsen"? That is the problem with you. You twist the words in our mouth.
What on earth are you talking about?? Please, read what I said again -- "I can't find very many pages that say 'dutch low saxon'". And it is true -- there are none, really, except messages from Servien.
Of all the pages in English about Low Saxon, none of them says anything about it.
And you twisted the words in my mouth too just now before I even had the chance to say them. "or would you still complain... ? That is the problem with you.", as if I had complained about it already... again you are being a hypocrit.
And again you have not responded to the most important points, writing them off as "trolling".
Mark