User talk:Robert Prummel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Sorry, it seems that nobody has given you a formal greeting to Wikipedia yet. So if you don't mind...

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

Zzyzx11 | Talk 02:27, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I allready made dozens of contributions on the Dutch, German and English Wiki and i greatly enjoy co-creating an encyclopaedia having read encyclopaedias for fun since my early childhood. Now all this no-use-knowledge will be regurgitated! I am aware of the fact that as a Dutchman I am bound to make mistakes in foreign languages.. I am fluent in several laguages but this does not make a " native speaker" out of me. My English is bookish and old-fashioned. I have been told that my pronunciation is is as snobbish as the Prince of Wales's ... I do hope that the English , or even American, Wikipedians will correct me whenever i sin against grammar, punctuation or spelling!

Faithfully yours,

Robert Prummel 22:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Huh?Biruitorul 21:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

"Commander of the Legion of Honor" has 9820 Google hits, versus 97 for "in the Legion". But I agree that it is a difficult question and if you feel strongly it's not a problem if you change it back. Maybe we could include a section about how difficult it is to translate the phrase. In any case, do you know why it's a disambiguation page? It doesn't seem like one to me and that status should probably go. Biruitorul 22:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


Dear Biruitorul,

The number of hits on Google is not the issue! There are guidelines or conventions on transcribing and translating French words.I concluded that these guidelines lead to the conclusion that we should stay close to the French and write "Honour". I am not fond of American "English" anyway. Are you, as a Romanian, having been educated in a Roman language? "Honor" just looks silly to me. Then there is the Philippine " Legion of Honor". Let's devote a page to that and stick to the rules of Wikipedia, not Googlepedia. A lot of people use American spelling. As Europeans we should stick to our roots.

Greetings from the Netherlands,

Robert Prummel Robert Prummel 22:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Légion d'honneur

Robert, please calm down. I haven't destroyed anything. Everything you write is in the history and can be restored. The sitation when I found it was a compeete mess. The article was at Legion of Honour (disambiguation) (which is certainly no place to put a complete article see WP:DISAMBIG). It had been the subject of a number of cut'n'paste moves. Which is not the right way to move articlles on Wikipedia. What I discovered was that the article had been living at Légion d'honneur until April of this year when someone decided to move it without discussion to Legion of Honor. You then came along and did a cut and paste move and I understand why you did it I am a Brit and Honor is not a normal spelling for me. I am trying to restore the original situation but it has to be done through the right process. Cut and paste moves at not acceptable, because you lose the edit history. Please see Talk:Legion of Honor where a vote to move is in progress. BTW as far as I recall I restored the article to the last version you edited. Please look through the edit history of Legion of Honour (disambiguation) and I think you will find that the last version you edited is the same as the one I restored to Legion of Honor. Jooler 09:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Well it appears that perhaps I didn't restore it to your last editfrom the disambiguation page, but from you last edit on that page. But you can perhaps understand the confusion involved. Jooler 09:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
      • Dear Jooler,

Editing the Legion was a lot of work and i was a bit cross to see that most of it was lost. I have since restored the article. The DISIMBAG was my mistake. I did try to rename it as the google rule was not appropriate. In my intertretation the rules of spelling on Wiki proscribe Honour. I do support Légion d'honneur with the appropriate links. I was clumsy in editing the disambiguation... i tried to put it right but failed. Thanks for your coöperation!

Greetings,

Robert

[edit] Re: Saint Stanislaus

Mr. Prummel,

I agree with your idea of addressing the four separate entities on their own pages. Keep up the good work. I chose the Disputed tag because I believe it would be one that all of the anonymous editors would agree with. Once they see this, they just might all follow the link tot he talk page and follow your suggestion. :-)

--ZsinjTalk 22:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Let's hope so! They are a queer bunch though... Robert Prummel 22:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


I disagree with separate pages especially if you going to give them ponderous ugly titles such as The order of Saint Stanislaus.(re)established in Poland in 1990. What little you have to say about the re-established order can easily be said in the Order of Saint Stanislaus article. -- RHaworth 08:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

my reply:

  • I agree that it is a bit of a mouthfull! It sounds a bit like " The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" doesn't it? That is because it is a diplomatic solution in a quarrel without an end. They all claim to be THE Order of Saint Stanislaus, and then claim that the other ones are fake. In fact they are all somewhat questionable. Then there is the issue of the propper name and style of one of the Grand-Masters and the indissolved and unsolvable question as to who was the legitimite Polish government in exile.

Given a free hand a number of anonymus contributers keep adding and deleting the same words over and over again at an astonishing pace. They do not reveal who they are and they do not discuss the questions before us. One gentleman once contributed a list of books and I added them to the appropriate branch of the Order. All I ever wanted to do was describe the historic order, now I found myself in a quagmire of pseudo-orders and well intended charitable foundations that call themselves orders. If I put all the information on these orders on one page there is no possibility to keep the subject neutral. The zelots of the various orders will get into a frenzy and this will undoubtably result in a useless, opiniated article that will change every minute or so. But I am open to suggestions...

Faithfully Yours, Robert Prummel 21:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I started or contributed to dozens of articles on orders of merit, try my dutch contributions on the Military Order of William and Orde van Sint Stanislaus ( Dutch Wiki). These articles give a lot of historical facts and pictures. Here all I ever get to is restoring mischief. I am happy to say that this one is unique! I am allso glad that there are only two orders of the Garter, the American one is , I am glad to say it, very meek. Would they dare to call Elizabeth II an imposter?

Hello Robert, I am not very often here on wiki.en., if you want contact please go to the German wiki. Greetings Alex--Alexvonf 10:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Order of Columbus

Your recent contributions to the Wikipedia article Order of Columbus are very much appreciated. However, please take a moment to look over your contributions for spelling, grammatical, and punctuation errors before submitting them in final. This will help lessen the amount of copyediting work that fellow Wikipedians need to do, and will help improve the overall appearance of Wikipedia. This is not meant to be a disciplinary message, but merely a friendly request. Thank you!

-- Kerowren 00:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Dear Kerowren, only native speakers can be expected to write and speak flawless English... I am a Dutchman and allthough I am fluent in English, French and German it would be foolish of me to believe that my English (or any other language) is perfect!

By the way, how many mistakes did I make in "Order of Columbus"? Robert Prummel 01:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey Robert, sorry if the template was a little too harsh. The mistakes in fact were more superficial than anything as the article is very small, so there's nothing to worry about :-). You can take a look at the log for the changes that I made. -- Kerowren (talk • contribs • count) 04:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fatherland and Motherland

Hi, Robert. You wrote:

  • Sir, you wrote ("patrie" means fatherland (from L. pater = father), despite having feminine gender grammatically) as a correction of my "It is LA patrie, to the French France is femminin and therefore " the motherland" To me as a Dutchman my country is my "vaderland/fatherland" Russians on the other hand have a motherland!". It is an interesting problem! The French speak of "La France", personify it with "marianne", a fair maiden. The Russians speak of their "Narodna", the motherland or "mother Russia", would you translate "Narodna Ruskya" (pardon my Rusian) as "Little father Russia" despite the original meaning? The French and Russians think of theit countries as femminin enteties and to you and me our countries are male. When I translate I consider this: what translation does most justice to the original meaning , sentiment and (political) message?
    My compliments with your page, I enjoyed the poetry! Robert Prummel 14:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC). P.S. On my own Dutch Wiki page ([1]) I put an Oscar Wilde portrait in a userbox.

Template:Gebruikersbox

My response. It is an odd thing indeed to have a feminine word that means "fatherland". Vive la langue française étrange! Despite the personification of France as Marianne, and the classic depiction of France as a bare-breasted woman holding aloft the blazing tricolor in the climax of battle, the writer of La Marseillaise chose not to use any of these cultural references, but preferred the specific word "patrie", which is clearly cognatic with the Latin word for "father". Maybe "fatherland" is not the best possible translation, but I think that "motherland" is even more distant. All I can tell you is what our own page on La Marseillaise says: the official English translation, according to the website of the French President himself, is "fatherland". That said, I recognise that translation of poetry is a difficult, nay impossible task. If you go for a literal translation, you lose the poetry. If you go for a set of words that more closely equates to the rhythm and music and feeling in the original, you lose the precise meaning. The French President's website apparently prefers the former solution; but you'll find various other translations all over the web, many of them making no reference to fatherland, motherland, or anything like those words. By the way, "narodna" is grammatically feminine in Russian, so there's no conflict with "motherland" in that case. Cheers. JackofOz 23:38, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:COAppiusix.gif

I've replied to your comment on the image. Gimmetrow 00:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Gimmetrow! I transferred the discussin to your "talk page", allright? Robert Prummel 02:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The picture of your cat has been automatically tagged for deletion, but can easily be saved

The photograph of your cat has been tagged for deletion because the rights to it have not been released. The best way to protect it for deletion is to apply a license that Wikipedia accepts. This can be done in two easy steps:

  1. Click this link
  2. Delete all the text that appears below == Licensing ==, and replace it with {{Cc-by-2.5}}. This means that others can use your image, but must give you credit for your image if they do so.

Let me know if you'd like more information or assistance. JDoorjam JDiscourse 01:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wei Hai Wei

I was looking at your stub article Wei Hai Wei and, before you proceed further, you may want to look at the Weihai in existence in wikipedia. Cheers! --Stormbay 22:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

  • These bl**dy Chinese names! They keep changing... I can turn Wei Hai Wei into a redirection. It was only written to fill an open space in the article on Sir Herbert Annesley Packer and I did not plan to persue the matter. One should leave things for others doesn't one? The article on Packer is enough work as it is anyway.Robert Prummel 23:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
    • It is tough to pick up . I wanted to save you some work if you were expanding. I expect a redirect instead of the text would be a good idea. Happy editing! --Stormbay 00:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Reichsritterschaft

I agree that order of knighthood is incorrect. categorization isnt my forte so please feel free to categorize it as you see fit. ill be keeping an eye on it and comment if neccesary. thanks Jieagles 02:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello Jieagles, Categorizing was not my forte either but once you get the knack of it it is great fun! I am now categorizing the 220 Orders of Knighthood on the Dutch Wiki. You are not the only one mistaking the legues of German nobles for Orders of Knighthood. The "Sankt Jörgenschild is often mistaken for an Order. The bounderies are somewhat vague... Robert Prummel 14:16, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cross of St James

Regarding Image:Jacobuskruis volgens Stalins en Graafland.jpg ... maybe you should load it to the commons:Category:Saint James Cross. --evrik (talk) 23:04, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

It is not much of a picture as it is... the heraldic atlas is to big and to old (edition 1932) and vulnarable to scan. It was drawn in a minute or so. I just wanted to show that serious sources give various models to illustrate the cross of Saint James. The spade or sword in combination with the fleury arms seems to be the distinghuising factor.Robert Prummel 00:12, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FYI

This user has a page on Wikimedia Commons.

--evrik (talk) 23:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:180px-Leninorden.jpg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:180px-Leninorden.jpg, by Fourdee (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:180px-Leninorden.jpg fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

This is not a state symbol it is a photograph of of a medal from unknown origins. To quote the law (from the UNESCO translation) "Derivative works and composite works shall be protected by copyright, regardless of whether the works on which they are based or which they include are objects of copyright." This is a derivative work. A photograph of an object (versus of a 2d image) is a derivative work. For example the blue background is not part of the medal, the lighting is not part of the medal - someone made this photograph and owns the copyright to it.


To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:180px-Leninorden.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 06:37, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crown of the Netherlands

I suggest you add some references to the article. You must have gotten the information from somewhere. As for the English, it could probably be improved if you used an English language spelling checker. DGG (talk) 21:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Well, it was easy to take the printed sources from my bookshelves. I allso wrote the much more encompassing Dutch article using these, and other, books. The neccessery refferences have been added, or so I hope. I leave the correction of my English in the hands of a "native speaker". I am a Dutchman and a leave it to me to judge the quality of written Dutch, then I will leave the English to an Englishman.

Faithfully yours,

Robert Prummel (talk) 14:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Order of Saint Charles

The mistakes that you have found must be fixed, I understand that, so if you could fix what you can, I will edit it, copy-edit, and fix any mistakes I find, and add references and it will be better than before. ~ Dreamy § 16:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


Hello Dreamafter! I was a bit harsh.... But there were so many mistakes... .An order of England, the military use, the strange way to describe a rosette. The American habit of calling everything a medal and an award makes it impossble to differentiate between an order of a state and the "hairdresser of the year" award. There is also a difference between medals, crosses, stars and badges. In phaleristics an idiom has been developped, just as in heraldry, to be able to call things by their exact name. Did you know the rosette that you decribed as a "It has a ring of clasping metal on the ribbon" is called a "depiction of a cartwheel" in a Wiki-article on a Baltic Order?. Writing articles on Wiki is a learning process, the Order of Merit (France) is a good example of an faultless article on decorations.

I am left with one question; The large number of appointments in a tiny state. Is there a reliable source ?

Faithfully yours,

Robert Prummel (talk) 17:16, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Silver Skates

Hej Robert...could you do me a favor and check out my edit at Hans Brinker and also my comment on the discussion page. My edit was only an attempt to give an alternate source to the tourist factor rather than the "local boy does good" factor. Whatever you decide...let me know...I'll leave the omission or re-instate. Bedankt--Buster7 (talk) 05:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!--Buster7 (talk) 20:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC)