User talk:Avernarius/Archive 1

Archive 1

Re: Wikipedia:Requests for page importation#Import of shq:Lektor (Universität) to Lektor uiversitar
Hello, thanks for doing that. Let's hope that gets a response. Graham 87 14:14, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

PàS Kwaï Tanoo
C'est à vous : HERE - for me it is too difficult. Yours AVS (talk) 09:58, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

OptimJ
Hi, I've declined your PROD on OptimJ. I suggest you try AFD if you still wish to seek deletion.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )  01:57, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Linking and overlinking
You beat me to it; I was already writing this, when your message popped up. As a first thought: German wikipedia has different rules than English wikipedia. (It really does; if you are more familiar with de-wiki, this will occasionally get you into trouble.)

Thanks for your contributions to Dasein ohne Leben. Regarding your comments about linking here, please read MOS:OVERLINK which says, Unless a term is particularly relevant to the context in the article, the following are not usually linked: 1. Everyday words understood by most readers in context.

Arguably, if the linked word were about Nazi propaganda, or film, or mental illness, this would be relevant to the article, which is about all of those things, and hence, a link might help. But there is no way in this article about Nazi propaganda films that a link to explain the similarities and differences between the responsibilities and authority of professors in institutes of higher learning in Germany and the United States is remotely relevant to an understanding of the article. Adding more links here is just link clutter, and as MOS:LINK says based on the results of a study, ""simply adding more links does not increase the overall number of clicks taken from a page. Instead, links compete with each other for user attention." That said, there are those that agree with you and militate for increased linking, and you can find their opinions on the MOS talk pages; however currently, the guideline is what it is, and one should abide by that, or try to modify it by bringing one's arguments to bear on the guideline talk page, and attempt to achieve consensus for a change to the policy.

In addition, WP:COMMONWORDS has more information about link clutter, and why words like "fate" and "professor" should not be linked.



No, it shouldn't, per WP:COMMONWORDS. I know that English is not your native language, but 'fate' is a common word that does not need explanation here, nor is it about the main topic of the article.



You are vastly overthinking this. Even if you were right about such minute subtle distinctions of 'presentation' with or wihtout re- (which I don't happen to agree with, but let's say for the sake of argument that you are right) nobody reading the article is going to be able to reproduce the subtlety of the meaning and argument about this going on inside your head, least of all by clicking through to the presentation or suggestion articles. So the links are for naught. Besides the fact that nobody will click on a link to such a common word.

If you feel strongly that these links must be there, or understanding of the article will be harmed, I suggest you make your case at Talk:Dasein ohne Leben, and see what comes of it, and/or attempt to change the consensus of the MOS guideline on linking.

Since we're here talking, the wording "claim of need" in the Plot section doesn't really work in English. I think I see where you're trying to go with this, though, as a translation for Forderung. As we all know, there's no 1-1 correspondence in words in different languages, and it could be a "call" for something, or it could be something stronger; we don't know what the original intent was of the German editor. But then, the original German editor (if they were doing things properly) was not doing original research so assuming good faith on their part, the choice of "Forderung" there would represent a fair assessment of the statements in the references used to compose that sentence in the German article. In examining that section of the German article, we see that there is no reference in the section at all, much less right after that sentence. So, we have no idea what the choice of that word is based on. In case like this, I would normally start by just doing an initial translation, and then go back and see what references could be found (in en or de) and if I couldn't find any to support it, I would either challenge the translation I just completed by attaching cn tags, or start cutting it back, or both. As it is, that whole section deserves an Unreferenced section template (in both languages). So in the end, I don't care what word you use to translate Forderung, and if you want to make it stronger than "a call for..." something, go for it, as long as it works in English (but note that "claim of need" does not). Cordially, Mathglot (talk) 21:54, 16 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your answer, which 'cures' my 'anger' on your rather rough modifications in the beginning.
 * Sure, there can be 'overlinking', but the function of such a link is also, to narrow the 'subset' of the words meaning, especially if such a word is used in multible meanings.
 * 'call/demand' - there was (already before 1933) a rather broad move/tendency/publicity towards such measures, e.g. Gedat (which I name as he was active later in the 'C'DU!). See more at de:Geschichte der Euthanasie and de:Geschichte der Euthanasie. And it is also sad fact, that a rather great percentage of parents approved such doing (see Götz Aly). AVS (talk) 07:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alfred Scharf, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of Frankfurt ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Alfred_Scharf check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Alfred_Scharf?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

If English phraseology is a problem, please use the Talk page
Hi Avernarius,

Thanks for your contributions to Dasein ohne Leben. If you are finding English phraseology to be a problem, you can always go to the talk page to discuss with other editors how to word an addition to the article. As an example, the change to the photo caption made no sense, but if you have an improvement in mind and are not sure how best to express it, please take it up on the Talk page, and I'm sure a solution can be found. Cordially, Mathglot (talk) 00:12, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * If there are no real arguments, one can always argue that way. Concerning the photo caption — reference needed. AVS (talk) 06:44, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Duplicate references are not needed; it's already there in the photo.
 * If you think there are "no real arguments" concerning your choice of phraseology, you are mistaken, but you are welcome to poll others for their opinion. The offer to use the talk page to discuss how to word things is a genuine one, meant to improve the article. Perhaps you are not aware of how your English comes across, and I have to tell you that sometimes as written it is reiner Kauderwelsch and completely unintelligible.  Other times, it's flawed but understandable.  If you are going to contribute to articles on en-wiki, a minimum bar of clarity is needed even if perfect grammar is not, so please do take advantage of the offer, if you need to.  Mathglot (talk) 20:35, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Aikkarappadi (disambiguation)


The article Aikkarappadi (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Per WP:2DABS"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 09:58, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Improperly formatted, please try again
You left a petulant message at my talk page. In an effort to keep the conversation in one place, I responded there. Cordially, Mathglot (talk) 02:07, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Smh
Since you have time to throw shade on my other talk page, I have time too. Amanda Murphy, Nadja Bender, Frederikke Sofie, Slick Woods, Ebonee Davis, and Anok Yai were written by hand in English without one word of translation except for my manual translation of Nadja Bender and nobody, has ever said they are of poor quality because they are written in the style of all model articles. I wouldn’t take your word for it because you clearly aren’t knowledgeable on the subject. Of those articles you cherry-picked, only Ebonee Davis was initially rejected due to perceived lack of notability. When I proved her notability it was approved. I even fixed Maartje Verhoef, Duckie Thot and Willow Hand, articles I didn’t create, to be approved when they were rejected for being badly written even though the models have notability. It’s comical to me that you would even try to compare them to Sophia Ahrens with no basis or correlation. If you’re bitter about me using Wikipedia’s automatic translation machine for Anok Yai then be my guest and go contribute to it. But I’d like to see a model’s article you’ve written from scratch since you’re so opinionated on mine. 🧐 Trillfendi (talk) 21:42, 5 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi,, please cool down. Excuse me, if I offended You. As I am writing also on als WP (where als:Sophia Ahrens – not by me – is also present), the article found my interest – nothing else. Using any translation programs fails – I tested out, believe me – if You are not able to polish the result. So, again : the contents of these articles on models are sufficent (my opinion) and should not be deleted. It is also quite obvious that they can't compare to e.g. Naomi Campbell. And to fr WP – just correct to 'Sur moi' and move the article to Your user space as adviced there. AVS (talk) 22:07, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! PCHS-NJROTC (Messages)Have a blessed day. 22:32, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Automatic translation
Hello, Avernarius, please do not use automatic translation in articles. In particular, I noticed this edit at Operation Weak Meat, adding a citation with the title, "translation by Google". This is worse than not having any translation, and in any case, is unverifiable. Please do not include any more citations of this type, and if you can remember if you placed any other citations of this type in articles, please delete them. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 13:06, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Usually, I do not need GOOGLE to translate German into English. Here, as you can see, it was used as a confimation of the preceeding reference − though GOOGLEtranslate usually produces mostly poor results. Nevertheless one can win a rough impression of some texts. AVS (talk) 06:44, 27 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I have removed it. Google translation can *never* be used in a reference to verify anything. Please don’t do this again, and if you’ve done it before, please delete them. Mathglot (talk) 09:41, 27 December 2019 (UTC)