Hi Mark,
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".
No Mark, ich habe einfach keine Lust mehr, dafür ist mir meine Zeit zu schade.
"Katt" had been edited by Sarcelles just before Ron edited it.
Mark, please read, what is there, and not, what isn't. http://nds.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Katt&action=history&offse... shows a list of all edits on nds:Katt ever since it was created on July 16th, 2004. Sarcelles is not listed here.
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.
Low quality can mean 1) Low quality of content 2) Low quality of grammar 3) Low quality of vocabulary etc.
- 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...
Shall we count it? http://nds.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Katt&diff=prev&oldid=2203... shows 39 words in red. I count All but 4 are spelling. 3 are words, 1 is grammar. What do you count?
it was made by a native speaker,
yada, yada, yada but by the first one, you
Some of them? You "checked the grammar changes"? Again, you are pretending that your Platt is better than Ron's.
I still state that http://nds.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Katt&diff=22047&oldid=220... did leave the grammar changes intact, apart from "Un Katten doot wäten" which I consider to be out of place for an excyclopedia.
(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.
Actually Sarcelles had been warned several times and then he was blocked for two days.
If you "appreciate his experience", then why did you revert some of his grammar fixes even AFTER you found out it was him??
Again, I have shown you that I did not.
Heiko