Hi Mark and the rest,
Final reply to your questions:
* Is it my native language: Bilingual, so yes, I didn't say this because in my opinion one only has one native language, and since Dutch is more often used I put it as my native language. Besides I don't get you not getting my point of bilingualism, your "Great Holy Emperor of Platt-Ausland" also is a "native-bilingual"
* Difference should be clear by now, if it's not tough luck, everyone else seems to understand, I'll explain further when you speak NDS...
* You also mention "Which I raised" you are right: which YOU raised, you invented the "problem" but there is no problem, so stop complaining.
Servien
2005/7/15, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com:
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.
Which language you write your excuse in, does not change the fact that you are only saying it because you have realised my arguments are sound and cannot think of a good response.
"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.
You are indeed right. I meant Slomox. They both start with an "S" ;p
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
- Low quality of content
- Low quality of grammar
- Low quality of vocabulary
etc.
"in that they need cleanup", means "low quality of content". I do not mind these pages, they exist on every Wikipedia. Low quality of grammar and low quality of vocabulary, however, are detestable.
- 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?
You changed "oder koter" to "ok koter schräven", "vörweser" to "vörfohr", "dör" to "dörch", "al de olen buurn in Ägypten" to "al de buern in 't ole Ägypten", "Un de Katten weern hillig." to "Katten weren dor dunntomaal as hillig ankeken.", "Un wenn se doodbleven" to "Wenn 'n Katt doodbleev", "wen" to "jichteneen", "slieken" to "anslieken" (this in particular is a typical Patentplatt construction -- not all Platt words are direct cognates of their German counterparts), "kan dat malöörn" to "kan dat maal malöörn", and a few other changes which weren't spelling, but also were more like adding content than changing grammar.
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.
Uhh... no.
(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.
I apologise for calling you hypocritical, I wasn't aware of this.
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.
And, in return, I have shown you that you did.
Best Mark _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l