User talk:Pankycont

Peter Handke
Hi. There was absolutely some valuable stuff in your addition to the Handke article, but overall I thought it was too utflytende, too much focus on recent stuff and a bit too focused on sources positive to Handke. Since I couldn't be bothered to sort the good from the bad I simply reverted it all. I know it wasn't an optimal solution. You may have noticed that I filed a puppet investigation. Have you ever considered writing for Wikinews/Wikinytt? They need people and would welcome stuff like the Handke controversy and so on. In a biographical article, exstensive focus on one controversy or incident easily gets undue, but in news article it would be very fine. Your writing style may be more suitable for news reporting than for an encyclopedia where the language is required to be very dry and toned-down. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 16:18, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello again. If you want to, you may send me an e-mail via the internal Wikistystem, so we can discuss what kind of thoughts you have about editing Wikipedia and if there is a better way forward than the current sitation. Iselilja (talk) 18:57, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I am looking forward to hearing from you regarding the subject of Peter Handke, on the article's talk page. --Pankycont (talk) 19:01, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

"For many", rather than "for some"
In a recent edit remark, I wrote "Speaking at the funeral of an accused war criminal is obviously controversial for some".

I meant to write "controversial for many". --Pankycont (talk) 09:05, 9 October 2014 (UTC)