Talk:Cieszyn Silesian dialect
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Deleted edits
Why were my edits deleted as "misleading"? Could Darwined perhaps explain?--Xixaxu 07:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV tag
External references links to which are contained in the article differ on classification of the dialect. Some claim the Cieszyn Silesian dialect is (i) a dialect of Polish, (ii) transitional dialect between Polish and Czech, or (iii) an independent language. Despite of that, the article claims the Cieszyn Silesian dialect is a dialect of Polish and does not mention any other classification. An edit requesting that this claim is referenced was reverted as being "misleading". Hence the NPOV tag.--Xixaxu 09:05, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- There is no doubt it is a Polish dialect. One can doubt only by not knowing a history and listening to todays' dialect. But go back to the beginning of the 20th century and read some texts written in the dialect from that period and you'll clearly see it is a Polish dialect with very little Czech influence. Today it sounds like a transitional dialect because of the presence (from 1920) of local people in the Czech state, which heavily linguistically influenced the dialect. But let's move some 500 metres to the Polish side of the border and you will hear more original version of the dialect (but more tainted by the correct Polish language). Btw. read pl:Dialekt śląski. - Darwinek 10:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- If there is no doubt it is a Polish dialect, I am sure you will find reliable sources to support the statement that it is a Polish dialect and not anything else. If you do not, the text should be altered. Before you support the statement by references or the article is altered, the NPOV tag should remain.--Xixaxu 11:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- I meant reliable sources. Yes, I would expect that Zahradnik does not have any doubts whatsoever that Cieszyn Silesian dialect is a dialect of Polish. I would not expect anything else from a Polish activist in Zaolzie.--Xixaxu 11:51, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe you are unemployed, well I am not, so I don't have time to browse libraries for literature. However in the future it will be altered to reflect the truth which you (as a Czech activist from MS Region) constantly try to revise. I would recommend you to stay away from these topics and get a life. P.S. And don't accuse Zahradnik of Polish activism, you don't know that historian! - Darwinek 11:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- Personal attacks will not resolve anything. I am not Czech and I am not from MS Region (whatever that means). I do have a life. And stop threatening me.--Xixaxu 12:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe you are unemployed, well I am not, so I don't have time to browse libraries for literature. However in the future it will be altered to reflect the truth which you (as a Czech activist from MS Region) constantly try to revise. I would recommend you to stay away from these topics and get a life. P.S. And don't accuse Zahradnik of Polish activism, you don't know that historian! - Darwinek 11:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Your tricks are fascinating as always. Other user added Hannan reference months ago with knowledge that article text is accurate and compatible also with Hannan. And suddenly you bring it and cite it adding a citation to your views. Hmm, where you get that book from, so suddenly? Give me Google Books link, because I don't believe you own that book or that you borrowed it suddenly from some library. I will revert you again and again, you can't stand a chance in pushing your views. - Darwinek 19:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- I do not do tricks and will not play any game of personal attacks and accusations. How do you know that "other user added Hannan reference months ago with knowledge that article text is accurate and compatible also with Hannan"? I do not know that. For summary of Hannan's book see Summary. Note that I am immune to intimidation.--Xixaxu 09:02, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Please explain in greater detail why do you think that (i) the external link is not in line with WP:EL and (ii) the Hannan's book summary is not in contradiction with your edits. According to the summary Hannan demonstrates that "the diachronic development of the Teschen dialects is that of a "mixed" language". Your edits are constantly excluding this sourced view as they claim that the dialect is simply a dialect of Polish, nothing else. As a result of this, your edits are contrary to the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view - the article does not represent fairly and without bias all significant views. It would be good if you could read the Hannan's book. I will find the editor who first inserted the reference to the Hannan's book and ask him/her for his/her views if you do not trust me.--Xixaxu 12:41, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sweb is a personal sites repository and thus is not eligible, same as MySpace or members.tripod etc. Btw user who inserted Hannan reference is my friend :), I am going to borrow that book and will reference the truth also with his book, to shut you up forever. - Darwinek 14:14, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- Please explain in greater detail why do you think that (i) the external link is not in line with WP:EL and (ii) the Hannan's book summary is not in contradiction with your edits. According to the summary Hannan demonstrates that "the diachronic development of the Teschen dialects is that of a "mixed" language". Your edits are constantly excluding this sourced view as they claim that the dialect is simply a dialect of Polish, nothing else. As a result of this, your edits are contrary to the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view - the article does not represent fairly and without bias all significant views. It would be good if you could read the Hannan's book. I will find the editor who first inserted the reference to the Hannan's book and ask him/her for his/her views if you do not trust me.--Xixaxu 12:41, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
-
I propose - as the solutiton of present debate - to insert exact citation from Hannan's sutdy into the article. Hannan is neither Czech, nor Polish, but he is perhaps a Canadian. His book was awarded Orbis Prize in 1996. So, even if his conclusions may be considered as controversial, his book is very important for the topic of the article and it should be cited there. --Qasinka 19:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- I will borrow that book to the end of June, at latest, will read it and insert citations to resolve it at last. - Darwinek 19:45, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Yes, Darwinek please borrow the book and read it yourself if you do not trust me. Before you do that, please leave the NPOV tag in the article. As an appetizer, please see the Amazon Product Description of the book. Hopefully you will be brave enough to insert also quotations which are not in line with your view.--Xixaxu 08:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC)