User talk:Antman

Rawr

User pages

Vandalization

"Stop vandalizing historical German articles with modern Polish names, before I start adding a German touch to the Polish wiki. Stay on your own Wiki. Antman 20:55, 16 October 2005 (UTC)"[reply]

I'm American, so I am on my Wiki. Unlike you. Space Cadet 22:46, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't care. You are purposely adding a Polish-bias to articles, and I am going to stop it one way or another. Consider yourself warned by the template. Antman 22:47, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - I hate Polish bias just as much as you do. What are you talking about? Space Cadet 22:55, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    - You are spitting in the face of policy established by the Danzig/Gdansk nomenclature debate. Antman 22:55, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      - No I'm not. Space Cadet 23:06, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        How aren't you? You have consistantly reverted usages of the word Danzig to the current Polish (not English, in the United States, as you should know, it is still colloqually known as Danzig) term Gdańsk, in articles which are based post-1308 and pre-1945. How are you not violating policy? Antman 23:09, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        Let me educate you on this: It used to be known as "Danzig" during the Cold War. But for over 15 years it's "Gdańsk". Do me a favor: go and sign up for a library card, grab Britannica and try to find "Danzig" even for the short historical period when the city actually belonged to Germany. Get back to me with the results. In the meantime try to do something constructive rather than vandalize articles about Polish provinces or cities. Space Cadet 23:21, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        "The usages of Danzig in these articles is referring to a time when it was known as DANZIG and was owned by Germany (or a German state). And a short historical period? I suppose 700 years isn't long enough to matter, considering Poland has only (re)existed for less than 100 years. Stop editing historical articles in an attempt to bias them -- you can't change history. Antman 23:28, 16 October 2005 (UTC)"[reply]
        Polish: 980 - 1308, 1466 - 1792, 1945 - 2005
        
        German: 1871 - 1918
        
        So there! Space Cadet 23:39, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        And the poll says *-1308 and 1945-* is Polish. The Poll defines policy. Deal with it. Antman 23:43, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        Deal with what? Show me your 700 years. Space Cadet 23:49, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        Deal with policy. Also, 1466-1792? That was part of Prussia then. Antman 23:58, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        I am dealing with policy. And Royal Prussia was just a name of a Polish province. Space Cadet 00:13, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        Well, Space Cadet, the city was officialy protected by the Polish Crown between 1466 - 1792 but most of Danzig`s inhabitants were German and that was the reason why Danzig received far reaching privileges of self-administration in the "2cd freedom of Thorn". Furthermore, one coold hardly allege that Prussia of 1792 was a Polish province! Therefore, Antman is right when he says that Danzig was a German city for almost than 700 years (1308 - 1945).
        Yeah, but you're talking about "Germans" who haven't seen Germany for centuries, because they lived in Poland for generations! Space Cadet 17:45, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        But spoke German, had German culture... Ameise -- chat 02:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        I strongly doubt that "culture". AFAIK they enjoyed the Polish privileges, they would never find neither in Germany nor in Ducal Prussia, and enthusiastically adopted Polish culture. Space Cadet 09:42, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        What do privileges have to do with culture? I am fairly confident that most were not Catholic (which IS a construct of culture). Ameise -- chat 22:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polish vs. German names

You may want to read Talk:Gdansk/Vote.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 02:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Prey tell, how? If you are 'enforcing' the policy, then it must mean it has been violated somewhere - please tell me where this has happen, and quote the relavant part of the policy so I can understand it quicker.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 04:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, you seem to believe that they are incorrectly used in Poland article - or did I get the wrong impression?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 04:14, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - From Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(use_English): There is disagreement over what article title to use when a native name uses the Latin alphabet with diacritics (or "accent marks") but general English usage omits the diacritics. A survey that ran from April 2005 to October 2005 ended with a result of 62–46 (57.4%–42.6%) in favor of diacritics, which was a majority but was not considered to be a consensus. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 05:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This is the same cr@p as what is happening in Spain, where town names such as La Coruña (Corunna, in English), Lérida or Gerona have been lost and forcely replaced by their regional variations in Galician and Catalan. It is so stupid. Why should a Spanish speaker have to call these cities A Coruña, Lleida or Girona? Their Spanish name should be used, in the same way that London is not called London in Spanish, but Londres. Cheers, 86.30.18.42 21:55, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

American German

Hello. I was wondering if you could please cite your sources for the American German article. Thank you. aliceinlampyland 22:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

If I had sources I would -- I was typing completely from memory and experience. Ameise -- chat 06:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Babel

Go right ahead, all of my userpage is GFDL and shared :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 04:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greater Poland Uprising

As for name, I fully agree. I was aginst this name but I was in minority.
As for German history context. I agree, but I don't know what Greater Poland Uprising has to Free City of Gdańsk or Hitler's won in elections. I know (I also have German roots, and part of my family still live in Germany so I know German POV, as good as You) that much painfull was lost of Western part of ex-Empire to France, than lost of survived by Polish majority, with instant tension, relativly poor province on east...
You, as native speaker, better know English so try to Correct it. Timeline is good think to describe conflicts (compare with WWII, war in Iraq and so on.)

Radomil talk 18:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Polish antecessors were from Grater Poland, and I still live here ;)
My German antecesors were from Franconia (see Bambrzy), but they polonized them selfsduring Kulturkampf. Others were (and still are, because my familly stil live there) are from Hannover.
As for German-Polish relation during revolution... it depends on part of Germany. Three of my greatgrandpas took part in WWI. One of them was sailor on SMS Westfalen. During revolution he left Wilhelmshaven without any problems from his German collegues. Other one was injured durin Battle of Verdun, and was in hospital in Bavaria. He escapedfrom hospital on January because he afrid of other German soliders... so You can't be to sure in generalization of Polish-German relations during revolution. Ah... third one returned to home in Ostrów Wielkopolski before revolution because he fought in Middle-East (in German altilery that was supporting Turkish forces in fight against British and Arab troops) and was infected by tapeworm sohe returned for short treatment at home...
Discusion about timeline is in article talk.

Radomil talk 19:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Warning: you are two reverts away from breaking the Three revert rule. This notice is being posted to all affiliated parties. — Deckill e r 02:28, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't reverted thrice today. I have reverted twice, and then edited someones talk. Ameise -- chat 02:29, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's why I said two reverts. Just wanted to give you guys a heads up. I started a discussion on the talk page for consensus. — Deckill e r 02:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what vandalsim ?

making false calims will be reported as therets and harrasment. Zeq 18:37, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, looks like I made an error. By the way; don't threaten me. Ever. Again. Ameise -- chat 18:38, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a threat it is a fact: I report people who threat me and harrase me.

If you don't do such things than it does not apply to you. simple. Zeq 18:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean this [1] than I agree with you - It was. Zeq 20:31, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism and comprehension

I'd keep this on the debate page but it's already cluttered enough. First of all, please read my entire comments:

They're being weighted less because (for most users) your edits have been only opinions related to this article.

Second of all, stop throwing around accusations of vandalism. It's impolite, uncivil and won't get you anywhere. There's a difference between disagreement and vandalism. If you keep calling everyone a vandal and a "Wikizealot" then it could be interpretted as a personal attack. I'd rather not see someone get blocked over that. Besides, it's not even productive in a discussion. --Wafulz 21:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, apparently in that discussion, making productive discussion is also unproductive, as it seems to be ignored in favor of zealous delete comments that don't even make any sense. Ameise -- chat 21:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on the Star Wars DRV

Okay. I'm not endorsing either side of this discussion, but I am asking you to please remain civil. It would be great if you could calmly state your arguments instead of making attacks and threats. Again, I'm not endorsing either side, but I am endorsing the civility of both sides. Thanks. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 03:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would be more civil if the other side would actually READ what I was saying. Ameise -- chat 03:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they would be more inclined to read it if it was stated politely. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 03:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- - I tried that a while ago in another delete... didn't work. Ameise -- chat 03:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]