User talk:Koenige

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome to the Wikipedia

Here are some links I thought useful:

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. The Wikipedia:Village pump is also a good place to go for quick answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be Bold!

Sam [Spade] 01:44, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

[edit]

Here are some tasks you can do:

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

  • You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
  • If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! - Randy Johnston 02:00, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] camoens

Koenige I agree with your comments on neutrality. You are right about CAmoens in University of Coimbra. No documents about it. Now, where else could he obtain his culture? For a wikipedian one should nsay he was at Coimbra not just to see the sights. My sources are Roger Bismut, Pina MArtins van Besselaar, Prado Coelho greetings netmendo

[edit] Trotsky typo

Thanks for changing "resinged" to "resigned"!

FYI, "resigned his position as Commissar ..." and "resigned from his position as Commissar ..." are both grammatically correct in English :) Ahasuerus 05:03, 29 September 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Wiki:pt

Olá Koenige,

Eu reparei que está a contribuir em artigos relacionados com a lusofonia e gostaria de convidá-lo para participar na Wikipédia em português, actualmente temos mais de 135 mil artigos. Sua ajuda será muito bem vinda.

Se por acaso tiver algum problema ou dúvida deixe uma mensagem na minha página de discussão.

Continue com esse bom trabalho,

Rei-artur 22:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Napster Pay revision

Um, don't you think it might have been somewhat more courteous to have contacted me about my recent addition to this page, rather than just wipe it out totally, and say nothing?

Were you worried I'd simply take 'revenge' and go and blitz *your* entries?

Well, I'm not petty like that, and would expect the same from other fair-minded contributors.

Now, give me your reasons why you thought the piece so 'biased' that not one single word could stand.

Rayd8or 16:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Rayd8or. I deleted your entry on Napster because it didn't sound neutral enough(WP:NPOV). A sentence like

Napster apparently has no qualms about promoting and selling the work of individuals convicted of the most serious crimes

strongly implies such a thing is wrong, which is not clear at all to me. You could say the same of most music stores out there, like iTunes, it is nothing specific to Napster, so I doubt of the encyclopedic relevancy of it. If can you provide some backing up that entry, and concerning specifically Napster, it might fit in. Like it stands, I doubt most wikipedians will accept it.
For that reason, as well as you not having other contributions on wikipedia, which made it easy to mistake you for a vandal, I didn't explain my revert. --koenige 03:12, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

You weren't sure whether or not I was a 'vandal'...? Are you being serious? I don't know what *you* think of when you use the term, but my definition would be along similar lines to this one: "One who willfully or maliciously defaces or destroys public or private property." I think most reasonable people would mostly agree with that being what is meant by 'vandalism'. Where does what I did with my entry overlap with behaviour like that? No abuse; no obscenity; no childishness. Not even sloppily written [no point in being falsely modest].

"A sentence like Napster apparently has no qualms about promoting and selling the work of individuals convicted of the most serious crimes strongly implies such a thing is wrong, which is not clear at all to me. "

A sentence like that strongly implies the wrongness of something..? I think not. If anything it's a *reserved* statement. 'Has no qualms', would have been a lot more high-handed, and yet still justified, considering the bald fact of the matter that Napster knowingly sells the music of killers and child rapists. The fact that such a thing means nothing in whatever moral framework you exist inside of repels me, but *that* is a separate issue from this one.

"You could say the same of most music stores out there, like iTunes, it is nothing specific to Napster, so I doubt of the encyclopedic relevancy of it."

So according to you (because the same may be said of other companies) pointing out a fact which may well be of concern to those wanting to know about the organisation, has no relevance..? That is an absurd statement. Peronally I didn't know of 'I Tunes' music policy; other people who *do*, are perfectly free to point out just where Apple stand on the matter. I may even do it myself if I get the time. If what you're saying is correct, then the wording could be changed to "in common with many other household name internet music providers...". Your last paragraph is again puzzling, and again doesn't follow any reasonable logic. Here's a section of official Wikipedia policy that you yourself link to on this very page

From [1]:

"The best way to resolve a dispute is to avoid it in the first place. Be respectful to others and their points of view. This means primarily: Do not simply revert changes in a dispute. When someone makes an edit you consider biased or inaccurate, improve the edit, rather than reverting it. Provide a good edit summary when making significant changes that other users might object to."

Since you're an individual who takes it upon themselves to alter (or in this case, obliterate entirely) other individuals' input, and in addition, takes pains to point out commonly accepted guidelines in this site, you should never make such glib and seemingly arrogant assumptions. Especially about new users.

Rayd8or 16:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] hi

Hi. I found you in categories of users who can contribute in English and Portuguese. I myself am a native speaker of English, but I'm well on my way to learning Portuguese. Just check out my user page and talk page, and join in any of the discussions. To keep updated, you can even put a watch on my user page, which will automatically watch my talk page. :-) learnportuguese (talk) 21:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)