User talk:Matthead/Archive2008

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Matthead. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

AfD nomination of East German jokes

An editor has nominated East German jokes, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/East German jokes and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 14:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

No content in Category:Austrian historical regions

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Austrian historical regions, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Austrian historical regions has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Austrian historical regions, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 13:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Populated since with a couple of articles. There are plenty which are qualified, considering the history of Austria. -- Matthead  DisOuß   14:15, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: quick on the draw

It's boring maintenance work, and I'm the only admin left doing that task. Now, two more things: my block log is from blowing off steam on IRC with several friendly admins; and you are also under the Digwuren restriction, which means any administrator can block you for any edits judged by them to be incivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith. Please try to work with the presumption that all of us are here to help the project, not piss off editors by going on deletion rampages. east.718 at 13:12, January 10, 2008

"any editor working on topics related to Eastern Europe". Eastern Europe is considered beginning East of Poland, while Karl III Wilhelm, Margrave of Baden-Durlach and Talk:Karl_Wilhelm_of_Baden-Durlach are topics pretty much in my back yard. When I created the redirect, you assessed it, surely while assuming good faith and that I am here to help the project, and then deleted it. Is that correct, or incivil, personal attack, or assumption of bad faith from my side? Anyway, thanks for restoring it. With just a little bit more patience, you could have saved us this issue. So, as you did blow off steam on IRC among fellow admins, where am I permitted to blow off steam, for example after witnessing this? German Nobel laureates are not exactly topics related to Eastern Europe, yet an editor not under the Digwuren restriction, never having edited the article before, shows up shortly after I did so, coincidentally. See also this, showing how Wikipedia spreads a claim added by another editor. The article has not been edited since, despite obviously having double entries now. Maybe you want to take a break from boring maintenance work to fixed this? Wikipedia:Verifiability is also a policy that needs to be respected, as I believe. -- Matthead  DisOuß   14:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Heinrich Hertz

Please consider re-visiting Talk:Heinrich Hertz#jewish ancestry. I'd be interested in your feedback about the suggested edit strategy I've proposed. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Löschig vo de Kategorie User als

Hallo Matthead, das chönnti dich interessiärä: User_talk:Black_Falcon#Category:User_als-N Gruäss DidiWeidmann (talk) 19:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Wehrmacht Heer

I have somewhat expanded your article, but much more editing is required--mrg3105mrg3105 05:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Kirlston - your Archive and Civility

Hi...

I believe a section of your archives (heading: January 2008) is located in the wrong archive "file" - it is placed in the 2007 archive "file".

I am interested in learning more about the reasons which you were blocked for 24 hours and the context. My interest goes back some time, you might remember that I responded to a comment of yours on the Pisudski FAC. Thank you for reading this message, please reply in my user talk page.

Sincerely,
--Kiyarrllston 18:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I thought I had changed the target to Archive2008, but User talk:Matthead/Archive2007 is used anyway. Hmm, bug, or wrong configuration by me, as also the target in the comment needs to be changed? I've set it up last year [1], maybe I got something wrong. I've replaced the template with the one given at User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Howto. It is rendered to almost the same, yet both targets are identical now. So I guess its the second one that counts. I'll leave the Archive2007 as is, don't want to start the 2008 archive with messages like these [2] [3] [4]. See your talk for more. -- Matthead  DisOuß   20:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

As the archive bots User:Werdnabot and User:Shadowbot3 are offline (Shadow1 has left Wikipedia), I'm trying MiszaBot now. -- Matthead  Discuß   18:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Helmut Dähne

On 24 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Helmut Dähne, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 18:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Doctor Luz Long

Hi Matthead, I noticed that you made a substantial edit to Luz Long, among them, that he is a Doctor. Do you know the circumstances under which he became a doctor, and where I could find a reference for this? It would be an interesting fact to add to this article. Thanks, Deathphoenix ʕ 20:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I've expanded the article with some links. Apparently, there are only short snippets of his bio available, and he seems to have studied law in Leipzig and promoted to doctor, very likely Dr. jur.. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:45, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the latest edits including the references! --Deathphoenix ʕ 14:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Casimir and Frederic

Please look at Talk:Frederick_II_of_Prussia#Survey and consider revising your vote at Talk:Casimir_I_of_Poland#Survey_2 accordingly. I certainly agree with you that we should have no double standards, and I'd gladly support similar renamings of other famous German monarchs.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I find it rather odd that someone seemingly filed several move requests Wikipedia:Requested_moves#26_January_2008 to support a desired move away from Casimir I of Poland. -- Matthead  Discuß   04:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Consistency, I think, is the answer. Space Cadet (talk) 12:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Consistency, as in keeping all articles as is, seems to have been out of the question. -- Matthead  Discuß   12:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Panta rhei. Space Cadet (talk) 12:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

On 2 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Herzogin Cecilie, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Archtransit (talk) 20:35, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I know it's water long under the bridge, but ...

When you moved Hans Müller to Hans Müller (chess player) and redirected that page to a disambig last July, you really should have fixed up the existing links to Hans Müller. Leaving them pointing to a redirected disambiguation rather than the correct page was a bit anti-social. Quale (talk) 18:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jagdschloss Glienicke

An editor has nominated Jagdschloss Glienicke, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jagdschloss Glienicke and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Glienicke

Hi, Matthead. I just did a major overhaul of Glienicke to make it better conform to the Disambiguation Manual of Style (MOS:DAB) as it was tagged as a disambiguation page and moved it to Glienicke (disambiguation) clearing out a space for you to turn the Glienicke page into an encyclopedic article. I would encourage you to take a look at the links pointing at Glienicke and see where they should point as you have far more knowledge in this area than I. If you have another vision for the purpose of the page, then feel free to revert my edits, but you should probably remove the {{disambig}} tag to keep another editor working in disambiguation from coming along and doing the same thing or requesting clean-up (which is how I came across the page). Best wishes. Gwguffey (talk) 04:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Logo avanti.gif

Thank you for uploading Image:Logo avanti.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 13:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:

Ok, let's take a cup of friendly coffee and discuss. What do you dislike on the changes by Guy Peters? ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 09:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

German names

Hello Matthead, well our conversation didn't grow up well before. So please tell me and explain why are you putting German names in the articles about Czech history? You argument that they were official until 1945, but you always forget to mention that there were two official names and you completely forget the history before the Germanisation of Czech lands after the battle of White Mountain in 1620. And you forget to tell that those places were established with Czech names mostly in the 10th, 11th century, so your arguments are not correct. I expect your answer at my talk page. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 11:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The account Tulkolahten is retired. -- Matthead  Discuß   21:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Naming debate at Sněžka-Śnieżka

As a participant in the last, unsuccessful bid to change the name of this article, you should be advised of a new debate to move the article about Sněžka-Śnieżka. Your views on the current proposal would be especially welcome. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 05:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I had made my views clear earlier, and provided Google Books counts for post-1990 English use of Schneekoppe outnumbering the Slavic names. -- Matthead  Discuß   20:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Mercedes CLR

Do you have any information on the collector that purchased the Mercedes-Benz CLR? It looks like you were the one that added that information and I was curious as to who purchased it. Thanks. --350z33 (talk) 20:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

In a 2001 event in Hockenheim, the CLR (and a 2000 DTM Merc) was entered under the name "Andreas Knapp-Voith", but was driven by veteran Harald Grohs. The CLR was since seen in a showroom (in the background, covered).-- Matthead  Discuß   21:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

GWS-Vorlage sind jetzt fertig

Hoi, nach dem "bösartigä" Raub vo oisärä Abchürzig "als" dur d' ISO han i jetzt wiä scho vor eewigkäitä värsprochä alli gws-Vorlage fertig gmacht und au diä zuäghörigä kategoriä erstellt. Die altä als-Vorlage hani la staa (cha dänn jedä sälbär entschäidä obär fortan di noiä boustäi brucht), han abär alli link uf di noiä gws-kategorie umgändärät, da ois ja d'als-kategoriä immär widär glöscht werdät, wenn si öppört noi erstellt ... - Damit dörfti dänn bald alli Alemannisch-Usär i dä änglischä Wiki widär chönä gfundä werde. DidiWeidmann (talk) 23:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

So an Bachel hat heit dia Kategorie fir'd Muetersproch glöscht. Sack Zement, was isch bloß los, passt denne garnex ?-- Matthead  Discuß   21:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

User boxes

Just a friendly note that the language code for the Alemannisch userboxes has been changed from "als" to "gsw", so you might want to remove the "User als" categories from your user page. (The {{babel}} template will put your page into the appropriate categories automatically, anyway.) --Russ (talk) 14:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

... and the category for native speakers was speed-deleted even though nearly 100 links to it:

• 15:05, 18 April 2008 VegaDark (Talk | contribs) deleted "Category:User gsw-M" ‎ (WP:CSD#C2 - Category has been speedy renamed)

-- Matthead  Discuß   21:13, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Category:User gsw-M

See Wikipedia:UCFD#Category:User gsw-M. Native language categories should be -N, not -M. VegaDark (talk) 22:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Dein Freund Weltraumkadett

hat kurz nach seiner Sperrverbüßung den allaselben Quark mit Kruläwjetch und Old and new Prussia, für den er gespertt wurde, wieder reingesetzt. Ich kenn mich mit den Regeln nich so aus, ob man bei solcher Unbelehrbarkeit wieder was machen kann, fängt die 3rr wieder bei 0 an? Leider hab ich zu wenig Zeit, dir bei deiner guten und notwendigen Arbeit hier zu helfen. Gruß --ThePiedCow (talk) 14:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

LUCPOL

I'm happy to inform you that from now on I will try to conduct my conversations with LUCPOL in English only, to make it easier for you to accuse me of stuff. Dein freund Weltraumkadett (talk) 01:45, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

geographical center of Europe

please, provide source for this edit. Pundit|utter 01:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

See recent additions. The patent story was taken from the German page de:Frauenkirchen, to which it was added [5] by an Austrian IP in January 2006. It was quoted in a 2007 speech of a Bavarian politician [6]. Hopefully he or his ghostwriters do not use text from Wikipedia.-- Matthead  Discuß   01:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Serafin

Yes, he's a minor pain, isn't he? He edits from the University of Guelph, and appears to be a resident of Johnston Hall. We could contact the authorities there and see if they can trace him - it shouldn't be too hard. Otherwise we could range block the University's IPs, but I'd be very reluctant to do that unless he really get out of hand. For now we can keep playing whack-a-mole with him until he gets bored. Best, Gwernol 10:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

(User:Adadasu is a sockpuppet) Thanks for your message. Generally, I welcome first and check edits after. That way I can perform whatever tagging or coaching is needed. By the time I'd finished reviewing this er, "user's" edits, he'd already been blocked. As you say, the edit summaries were not a good sign, and the edits were extremely POV. Cheers and happy editing. Dlohcierekim's sock (talk) 14:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiCookie

Just stopping by with wikicookies for those editors who started new articles today. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Gerd Ruge

A tag has been placed on Gerd Ruge requesting that it be speedily deleted .... blahblah deleted ... criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Corvus cornix_talk 23:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, fantastic, well done. Just created a stub for a notable German journalist, and within a minute while I'm over at his de-Wiki article, you place tags here and there. How about some patience, like two minutes? -- Matthead  Discuß   00:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Matt. I have remove the CSD tag, added an "underconstruction" tag and (roughly) translated the bulk of the article, so nobody will nominate it for deletion as a non-English language article. I think that Corvus just happened to catch the article at the wrong time when it was still a one-line stub, but of course, Gerd Ruge would easily satsfy notabilty criteria. What I would suggest though is, that if you are bringing articles over from the German wiki, which is a good idea, you might want to translate them before you create them here, or at least, create them over here with an "under construction" tag already in the article so they are less likely to be nominated as a speedy deletion.Anyway, I will take another look at the article later tonight and tidy up any work I have done on the article. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 02:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Pinkowski-Institute

As reviewing administrator, I declined to delete the article--but it will certainly be sent for Afd, and I strongly advise you to make some serious effort to make it more neutral. DGG (talk) 15:36, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I have nominated Pinkowski-Institute, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pinkowski-Institute. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? ukexpat (talk) 15:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

As stated previously, I created this article only as the "Institute" is used as source on Wikipedia, and I want to have this investigated. Afterwards, the article may be deleted. -- Matthead  Discuß   16:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

You might also post that isssue on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/NoticeboardSkäpperöd (talk) 19:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Just done so, thanks for pointing to it. -- Matthead  Discuß   19:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Please explain

Why do you remove country of birth for several people and their citizenship ? --Molobo (talk) 18:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

If Marie Curie has Russian Empire as her country of birth, what's wrong with Fahrenheit having been born in Poland? Dein Freund Weltraumkadett (Umlaufbahn) 21:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 12 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Danzig Rebellion, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 06:16, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Gdansk rule

Bogislaw vs Bogusław, Stettin (Szczecin) vs Szczecin etc is an RFC I filed to avoid further edit and rv wars; maybe you know a board where I can draw some attention to this case... Skäpperöd (talk) 09:01, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Naming conflicts in regard to the history of Poland are a perennial pain in the Wikipedia. I had recently posted (again) to Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)‎. Due to the persistence of a few people who specialise in this field, I'm afraid this is something which has to be discussed and enforced by ArbCom. -- Matthead  Discuß   11:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

East Prussian plebiscite

Dear Matthead,

maybe You are interested in the latest discussion at East Prussian plebiscite. Somebody added a map showing a Polish Majority in the area, which is obviously wrong (98 % voted German). Would be nice to get some assistance.

Best regards (HerkusMonte (talk) 16:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC))

Somebody added a map? The usual suspect, I'm afraid? I better get sunglasses to protect my eyes against the horrible composition of prime colors which is to be expected. -- Matthead  Discuß   21:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M41A pulse rifle

Hello - seeing that you commented on this AfD, could I have you give it another look?

I have two main problems with the process in this case. First off, the nominator removed/redirected all the links to these articles in the AfD BEFORE the AfD was decided. I think this is problematic.

Secondly, he lumped all of them together in one AfD, even though many of the articles have quite a bit of content in them, which makes me feel this, again, is inappropriate. This also causes an associated problem, because I have now been doing quite a bit of work on Sulaco (spaceship) in response to noticing the AfD, and feel that it has enough references and shows enough notability to stand on its own.

So as above, could you be so kind and look at the discussion again? Ingolfson (talk) 12:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Körner

I seem to have missed the point of your page move on Körner. Could you elaborate? Agathoclea (talk) 15:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure you'll get the point now that I've saved the disamb for a couple of persons named Körner. I've never known that there is also a place named so. Moved it to Körner, Germany. -- Matthead  Discuß   15:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess I fixed the articles and links now. -- Matthead  Discuß   17:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Warned

Cease comments such as shown here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement#User_Matthead immediately. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Moves of Cosmographia and Cosmographia (disambiguation)

I believe that the moves of these pages without prior discussion were unwarranted and not in accord with WP:NAME. In particular, Cosmographia of Bernardus Silvestris is an awkward and unacceptable article title. I've therefore taken the matter to WP:ANI, where you are welcome to comment if you wish. If an admin agrees with me and moves the articles back to their original titles, and you disagree with this action, I suggest that you take the matter to WP:RM. Deor (talk) 01:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Relax and AGF, Deor. Explained at Wikipedia:ANI#Unwarranted_page_moves. -- Matthead  Discuß   02:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Deletions of redirects regarding Akademisches Gymnasium Danzig

You intentionally created broken redirects? Well... please don't do that in the future. I can restore them when they're no longer broken. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I can't do everything at once. But I have now created a stub at Academic Gymnasium Danzig. -- Matthead  Discuß   21:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Restored. Indeed, you can't do it all at once. But if you create the redirects second, they won't ever be deleted as broken. ; - ) Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:25, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Cosmographia (Nicolaus Germanus)

Please don't create redirects like this to articles about the authors. It gives the (false) impression that the article has been created when it has not been. gren グレン 00:12, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit summary

Please try to use edit summary in the article Masuria. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 17:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Please note that not using edit summary is not against any policy, but use of edit summary is recommended. Per Help:Edit summary, It is good practice to fill in the Edit Summary field. Help:Edit summary also states that Always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 17:40, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Fixing a number of links according to recent article moves (to Peace of Thorn (1411) & Second Peace of Thorn (1466)), which is uncontroversial and self-explaining, I don't want to double the work by writing into the edit summary what is written in the article anyway. Your four edit summaries to my talk page have not been very talkative, either. -- Matthead  Discuß   17:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:

Yes, of course I read the discussion. I saw your arguments there without you needing to repeat them. But if you are unhappy you can bring it up with another administrator. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 03:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

No consensus is an explanation, as WP:CONSENSUS is policy. It simply wasn't there. What you essentially are arguing I do is enforce once poll without anything like consensus over another which just fell short of it, because I am to hold that the arguments that you used were stronger. That's not how it works I'm afraid. Obviously you believe they are stronger, but actually the arguments on neither (or no) side clearly proved the relevant policies applied clearly in their favour. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 05:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Academic Gymnasium Danzig

On 29 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Academic Gymnasium Danzig, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 05:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Cosmographia (Sebastian Münster)

On 29 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cosmographia (Sebastian Münster), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 11:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Königsberg forts

Would you be able to help in sourcing information about the Königsberg fortifications that were built around the city in 1888? The fortifications included fifteen numbered and name forts, and I have so far only been able to discover names of seven (eight) of these. Regards--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 00:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll have a look occasionally, but I'm not much of a military buff. Fort III seems too be famous. See also [7]-- Matthead  Discuß   01:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 7 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Große Freiheit Nr. 7, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 05:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

List of 24 Hours of Le Mans winners

I noticed your addition of a second chart to this article, regarding the total number of wins earned by a driver from each country, alongside the existing chart of the total number of drivers from a country which have won. I have to wonder if maybe this second chart isn't a bit redundant? I know the information is a bit different, but it just seems to me that they're similar enough that they could almost be integrated into a single chart with two columns. The359 (talk) 19:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I've combined some tables now, leaving three, sorted by drivers, by nations, by constructors. -- Matthead  Discuß   20:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

6/9 DYK

On 9 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with facts from the articles Reichsflotte, and Battle of Heligoland (1849), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford ^Pray 01:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Paulskirchenverfassung

On 9 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Paulskirchenverfassung, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 19:43, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Dollfuß vs. Dollfuss

The move discussion at Talk:Engelbert Dollfuß could use some more input. Care to join in? Libary (talk) 00:05, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Gdańsk (Danzig) Vote

You seem to be misinterpreting the Gdańsk (Danzig) Vote policy. Indicating the country that the city was part of at the time appropriate to the article is most definitely not against that policy. Caerwine Caer’s whines 03:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I do apply the policy, and leave the (mis)interpretation to others. The vote did not chose "Danzig, Royal Prussia" nor "Gdansk, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth". Calling the city "Danzig (Gdansk)" in biographies of clearly German figures is enough of a hint for readers. Those who want to look up the city's history and political affiliation can do so elsewhere, we don't want every biography on the List of people from Danzig to become an edit war battlefield, too. That's why the wording of the vote has to be applied and enforced. Gabriel Fahrenheit has travelled and worked in many cities, how come that only Danzig is subject to endless editwarring? Could it be because certain editors are desperately trying to push their nationalistic POV into the many biographies of persons who clearly were part of German culture? Also, be warned to to remove sources again, like you did here. -- Matthead  Discuß   04:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

You added multiple sources for the uncontroversial fact that Fahrenheit was ethnically German. Maybe one is needed for those who insist that every sentence in an article needs a reference of its own, but five is definitely massive overkill, and I wasn't going to pick which one. If you feel that there must be a reference there, go ahead and place one, but multiple ones are overkill to the point of POV pushing.

As for the vote, the clear intent of the wording of the vote was to keep people from using Danzig (Gdansk) (or Gdansk (Danzig)) in articles such as Fahrenheit's on every instance of the city in the article. The vote did not address whether or not to add the country the city is in at the time in the places where the country a city belongs to would normally be placed. Cities of birth and death are customarily noted as to which country the city is in. Should Netherlands be removed after The Hague? Caerwine Caer’s whines 17:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Since you keep refusing to pick one source for uncontroversial material, I trimmed it down to one for you. Caerwine Caer’s whines 17:23, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

You came here accusing me of "misinterpreting the Gdańsk (Danzig) Vote policy" at Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit, an accusation which soon was happily picked up by somebody else, and then started to lecture about "the clear intent of the wording of the vote". You complain that I added 5 sources for "the uncontroversial fact that Fahrenheit was ethnically German", even call that "overkill to the point of POV pushing", while you have not worried about the 3 sources that had been added in an attempt to extend the controversial status of the city to the person, something that is POV pushing. You know very well that the infobox entry "citizenship = Polish" was repeatedly re-added since a by now community banned user in violence of WP:No original research had started to claim Polish citizenship for Fahrenheit, a bandwagon on which you jumped on twice [8] [9]. Your edits and comments are anything but uncontroversial. Biographies are not the place for edit wars about the status of a city, thus I ask you to stop removing uncontroversial sourced content while adding controversial unsourced claims. -- Matthead  Discuß   00:22, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Believe it or not, I don't inspect every edit. If you expect that level of attention from editors, I do find it strange that you bring up two issues that in the edit that I had made to the article most recent to your last comment, I had already addressed by not restoring the Polish citizenship entry and trimming those 3 references to 1 as well. Caerwine Caer’s whines 03:20, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Too little too late, as they say. Besides, you now more or less reverted again, discarding my edits once again. If you really are interested in fixing biographies, I strongly suggest to you not to continue the annoying Polish POV edit wars about clearly ethnic Germans on the List of people from Danzig, but to clean up the articles on the List of Poles first. Picking any random name from there, like Stanisław Kostanecki, with high probability leads to a bio neglecting to mention that there was no Polish state from 1795 to 1918. Funny, isn't it? -- Matthead  Discuß   13:09, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Conflicting nationality claims don't obsess me, so while I have placed a couple of articles that have piqued my interest on my watchlist, I'm not about to make that the primary focus of my Wikipedia editing. At least the German/Polish conflict doesn't reach the level of idiocy that Macedonia can excite. Caerwine Caer’s whines 22:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Silesian footballers

Ok, how only foundling a more of time. LUCPOL (talk) 16:35, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Tsander

I'm not sure what to say about Tsander's origin. Was he a Soviet scientist or a German scientist or a Latvian scientist. The problem is that his birthplace, racial origin and citizenship are three different things. His Baltic German ethnicity is already mentioned in his biography. I don't think it is clear what to say. DonPMitchell (talk) 17:18, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

We say what reliable sources say. I've added refs mentioned in talk. -- Matthead  Discuß   17:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't doubt that Zander came from a German speaking family. But what is his nationality? DonPMitchell (talk) 20:07, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Nationality is often controversial and should not be boldly stated in many bios. For example, what is George Washington's nationality? During most of his life, he was a British citizen, subject to the king, but that is neglected in his bio. Zander was born in Imperial Russia, and when he was in his early 30s, it became the USSR, so he was neither Imperial Russian nor Soviet citizen during all of his life. If you are interested in odd claims about nationality/ehnicity/citizenships, look at the List of Poles, which includes "Konstanty Ciołkowski, spaceflight pioneer". -- Matthead  Discuß   20:55, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Most of the Soviet rocketeers (Korolev, Glushko, etc) were born before the 1917 revolution. Nobody has a problem calling them all "Soviet". Tsander writes things like "our grand Soviet army", which suggests that he felt himself to be a Soviet citizen, which he legally was. The article discusses his family ethnicity, which is fine. But I believe it is incorrect to replace his national origin with an ethnic description. Tsander was a Soviet citizen working on rockets in Moscow. That makes him a Soviet rocket pioneer, not a German rocket pioneer. It is exactly like the claim that Tsiokovsky is Polish. DonPMitchell (talk) 22:51, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Wernher von Braun then is an American rocket pioneer, not a German rocket pioneer? -- Matthead  Discuß   23:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

von Braun was born in Germany and is called a "German rocket scientist". Tsander was born in the Russian empire, embraced the Soviet Union after the revolution and is therefore a "Soviet rocket scientist". It not necessary to remind the reader that a Soviet citizen used to be a Russian citizen. It is not proper to emphazise his German ethnicity by repeating it twice and using it in place of his nationality. His family background is properly placed in the Early Life section. DonPMitchell (talk) 00:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Strange article found

Regions of Poland - to be sincere, it does not surprise me to see Samogitia as a Poland like region, but Prussia, that did strike me. i did tag it as unacceptable, would you take a look there? Thanks.--Lokyz (talk) 05:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Rotherbaum

On 21 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rotherbaum, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 17:40, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Käte Strobel

On 1 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Käte Strobel, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 20:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

List of Dukes and Grand Dukes of Mecklenburg

Hi. I wonder if I could ask for a little help with this list. Specifically, I'd be grateful if you'd check my translation of the text at the beginning (the opening paragraphs) by going to the German version, making sure it's correct, and fixing any mistakes. Thank you very much for your consideration. Biruitorul ^Talk 05:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Made some quick copyedits and translated the template. -- Matthead  Discuß   08:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Very nice. I appreciate it. Biruitorul ^Talk 14:30, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Georg Braun (rider)

On 3 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Georg Braun (rider), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 12:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

St. Maria ad Gradus

On 5 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article St. Maria ad Gradus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 07:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Fritz Huschke von Hanstein DYK

On 8 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fritz Huschke von Hanstein, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Congratulations! --PeterSymonds (talk) 09:29, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Giant Mountains

I see you are advocating (and righfully so) to move the article under English name. Could you move the article please. Take Bohemian Forest and Ore mountains as examples to follow. I mentioned in the discussion, I think it is obvious decisition, but I see some strange resistance from other people, we can also start vote for move. --IEEE (talk) 19:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Being a regular user, I can not move Karkonosze to Giant Mountains as the latter redirect was edited [10] and thus is protected against a move. The decision of the closing admin User:Deacon of Pndapetzim to decline the move, despite overwhelming evidence, was discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Requested_moves#Request_review_of_no-consensus_closure_of_Karkonosze_-.3E_Giant_Mountains and at User_talk:Deacon_of_Pndapetzim#Karkonosze_to_Giant_Mountains, to which he answered at User_talk:Matthead/Archive2008#Re:. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:24, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Erzgebirge

Thanks. I feel far more comfortable now. ClemRutter (talk) 17:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Budweiser Bier Bürgerbräu

On 16 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Budweiser Bier Bürgerbräu, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 18:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Galeras

Why have you requested the deletion of those articles? They seemed notable authors to me. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Whale tails need your help

I have trying to put together a comprehensive story of the Porsche 911 whale tail rear spoilers. But, the without much prior knowledge, the more I am delving into the stuff the ore I am getting lost. May be you can help. Take a look, please. Aditya^(talk • contribs) 15:11, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Digwuren

The Arbitration Committee has rendered decisions passing a motion to apply discretionary sanctions remedies to the case linked above. Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict ("articles which relate to Eastern Europe, broadly interpreted") if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.

The final text of the motions can be found at the case page linked above.

— Coren ^(talk) for the Arbitration Committee, 14:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Karl Höfer

A tag has been placed on Karl Höfer requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Hqb (talk) 13:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but when I saw the article it contained virtually no content, and in particular no indication of why the subject was considered notable - nor did a quick Google search turn up any obvious indication of notability (any hits were swamped by Karl Hofer). The article had not been edited for 10 minutes, and there was no indication (such as {{underconstruction}}) that additional content was forthcoming in the near future. I have removed the {{db-bio}}, but in the future it might save everyone some time if you create articles in a more complete form. I understand your annoyance about over-eager speedy tagging, but I believe that under the circumstances this particular tag was not unreasonable. Thanks, Hqb (talk) 14:05, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

While tagging may not have been unreasonable, it still was annoying. I had to connect some dots first too, creating some articles, adding links to already existing articles etc, all while being busy in discussion, and on German Wiki, too (where they speedily deleted my stub on the battle). In the future, I recommend to you to have a look into the recent contribs of the user to see what he is busy with. Rome was not build in a day either. -- Matthead  Discuß   14:13, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Move

What is your proposed move in relation to Kulmerland? PatGallacher (talk) 16:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, the article the redirect points to should be moved, see Talk:Chełmno Land for discussion and sources. The current name is unsourced, the article should be at the common name in English, Kulmerland. -- Matthead  Discuß   16:42, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Your rename of Chełmno Land

Matthead, I don't think that asking you to file a proper WP:RM request for a controversial rename is a "reckless POV pushing". Your suggestion to rename the article to the German name has been already contested by another editor before, and you've been advised to go for WP:RM instead. Why did not you do it but instead renamed the article yourself ? As to this edit of yours, I have no doubt that you did it on purpose to make a simple revert of your rename impossible. And now you are reporting me ???! :-) --Lysy^talk 13:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Sedan

Did you even read my comment on Talk:Sedan before reverting? I am not disagreeing with you about the ambiguity; in fact, I tend to think you are correct. But my objection is about process -- this is a potentially disruptive change to many other articles that shouldn't be done without discussion and consensus. The correct course is to use the template {{move}} to propose a move of Sedan (disambiguation) to Sedan, then list the proposal on WP:RM. If you do that, we can form a consensus instead of having an edit war. --Russ (talk) 13:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I did not move, some body else did. The potentially disruptive change is not disruptive, all articles can be fixed, with a bot if needed. No harm done, except to the old habits of a few. -- Matthead  Discuß   15:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

That's not the point (and your estimate of the capabilities of bots is, sadly, overly optimistic). The point is that there's no way to determine whether it's "a few" or many until the move has been proposed and discussed; continuing to revert the redirect is not constructive. Sedan's been an article about a type of car for the past two years plus; will it hurt anyone if stays that way for another ten days or so to allow discussion? --Russ (talk) 15:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, as I understand, it was your RussBot which fixed the links this afternoon anyway? Kind of ironic? Whatever, I've cast my vote at the move proposal, and I'm out of this for now. -- Matthead  Discuß   19:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Sedan Edit War

I have protected Sedan given the on-gong edit war. I would remind you of WP:3RR. You have reverted this article three times. I have chosen to protect in this case. However, repeat conduct like this will likely result in blocking. Please discuss this issue on the relevant talk pages. Community consensus should determine the result; not edit warring. Let me know if you have any questions. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 6 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Annaberg, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 14:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Arbitration -- FYI

You're mentioned in two statements in the current request for arbitration about Piotrus. See WP:RFAR. Avruch^T 23:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Matthead, if you do not want to suffer the fate of Petri Krohn who was blocked for a year as a result of an arbitration case he was no party to, and in which he did not want to participate, because he had decided to avoid all further contact with the guy who the discussion was about (Digwuren, who was also banned for a year but may since have returned), please, I beg you, go to that arbitration case: [11]. I would answer there myself in defence of you (Wikipedia actually needs a German nationalist like you), but I have no recent quarrel with the Proconsul. --Paul Pieniezny (talk) 10:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Gee, some more drama around Piotrus, and while they're at it, I'm supposed to get a prolonged or infinite Wikiholiday? Thanks for informing me. The AN/AE thread I had contributed to was archived, and the RfAr accepted as Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Piotrus_2. BTW: Am I now English Wikipedia's official German nationalist? Very flattering. :-/  Matthead  Discuß   20:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Peace and joy, my friend. Fear not, as the only discussion now at the "evidence" page getting close to you is this Thane Rosenbaum thing, I solemnly swear to be prepared to bear witness to the fact that Der Spiegel is NOT a tabloid (despite its high circulation) and not anti-Polish either and that you were quite right to say so. Nu, anderweitig gebunden, --Paul Pieniezny (talk) 10:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Steinmetz Diamond Group

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Steinmetz Diamond Group, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/691657/?hcode=relatednews. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:35, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

05:09, 6 September 2008 Orangemike (talk · contribs) deleted "Steinmetz Diamond Group" (A7 (group): Doesn't indicate importance or significance of a group/company/etc.)

Special:WhatLinksHere/Steinmetz_Diamond_Group, Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Articles

German Grand Prix

West German Grand Prix is historically accurate and helps differentiate the West German Grand Prix from the East German Grand Prix.Orsoni (talk) 04:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

The MotoGP web site lists it as the West German Grand Prix which highlights the confusion. I'll bring it up for discussion on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Motorsport discussion page and see if there is a general concensus.Orsoni (talk) 10:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

9/13/08 DYK

On 13 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Freddy Kottulinsky, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thank you for your contributions! -- RyRy (talk) 08:48, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Akademie Verlag

You created Akademie Verlag from the German. I may have spotted some problems with it. Would you be interested in commenting at this thread? Carcharoth (talk) 13:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Manthey Racing

I'm a little confused why you created a redirect from Manthey Racing to Porsche in motorsport. Manthey Racing is an independent team, they're not like the Martini Racing/Rothmans Porsche/Porsche System Engineering/Porsche KG names that the factory has used. See their home page. The359 (talk) 20:03, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Manthey has close ties with the factory at least since they had pioneered one of two "private" 996 GT3 in 1999. His Nürburgring car receives factory support (e.g. a 3.9L engine) including factory drivers. Well known fact, but Porsche is trying to hide factory involvement. -- Matthead  Discuß   20:20, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

I know they have ties to the factory and that they have run some of Porsche's launches of the 996 and 997 as a front for Porsche itself, but I don't think they're any more a factory team than Flying Lizard Motorsport in ALMS or Prospeed Competition in FIA GT. Manthey's normal running in VLN isn't really any more factory backed than them. They're an independent team, and should have their own article rather than a redirect to Porsche in motorsport. The359 (talk) 21:26, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

So write an article. Until that is done, a redirect to Porsche in motorsport is better than nothing about the racing kind of Manthey at all [12]. -- Matthead  Discuß   21:36, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

But Manthey Racing has competed with cars other than Porsche. It's incorrect to redirect a team that happens to be Porsche supported now, when they should not be associated solely for their Porsche involvement. Their history has the team competing in Mercedes originally, and Olaf Manthey himself has competed in Fords, Rovers, and Audis.

"Nothing" is better than a redirect that does not belong. The359 (talk) 21:41, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tznkai (talk) 15:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Did you realise, you're affected here 84.139.211.90 (talk) 09:26, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, folks, for warning me about that Piotrus case. I had an occasional look into these pages, which are 450+ and 850+ kilobytes long, but felt no desire to participate. -- Matthead  Discuß   10:24, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

That was not delberate

It was a technical mistake I wanted to copy the whole name but, by accident, I deleted it so I've put back the name that was next to it (I thought it was the right one). You can easily trace that looking at my later edtitions on that page. You schould also talk to that guy: 71.137.198.58, not to manipulate the data (he says none and there is 92 and 56!!!). Opole.pl (talk) 07:17, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Udo Schütz

On 17 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Udo Schütz, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 08:07, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Apologies for the error. Usually I double and triple check that the credits are going to the right people, but I was very tired when I did those credits earlier, and I'm afraid I went into autopilot mode once or twice. I'll try to be a bit more careful next time. Gatoclass (talk) 12:55, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Why a redirect?

Talk:Tiedemann Giese#Mauritius Ferber. You created the redirect in 2006... why? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:11, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, these [13] [14] edits show that it was necessary to fix the name. I've created a redirect pointing to Giese as he had a similar life, and the article could serve as a template for a stub which was not written until a few minutes ago. -- Matthead  Discuß   22:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Mauritius Ferber

On 8 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mauritius Ferber, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

DYKBot (talk) 22:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ivo Schricker

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ivo Schricker, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

No references. Poorly written article.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Ravichandar_{My coffee shop} 07:51, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

What's the problem, besides somebody having recently added a lot of irrelevant stuff that should be removed without much further ado? Adding some references is also not hard, even though biographical data is scarce. Merry Christmas, BTW. -- Matthead  Discuß   12:13, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

WikiThanks

Thank you for this edit you did to clean up Mir (disambiguation). -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:41, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Did you know nomination of Prussian G 8

Hi Matthead. Thanks for submitting Prussian G 8 to Template talk:Did you know. Unfortunately, it is currently not eligible for "Did you know" consideration because it lacks references, inline or otherwise. I notice that the article is a translation from the German Wikipedia, are you sure that the information is correct? The article itself is quite nice, so if you get a chance to add references and citations, please let me know and I will be happy to re-review the nomination. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 14:43, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Oops, I had forgotten to add <references/>. The story of the return form Turkey is covered in a book that was already listed at the museum's article. -- Matthead  Discuß   15:37, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Matthead. I've added some more references. HTH. Gruß. Bermicourt (talk) 16:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I have commented at the nomination's entry at Template talk:Did you know#Prussian G 8. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)