Revision as of 10:44, 3 July 2012 editTrekphiler (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers63,539 edits anybody read German?← Previous edit |
Revision as of 11:34, 3 July 2012 edit undoAndrew Dalby (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers18,532 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → |
Line 9: |
Line 9: |
|
The birth and death years are inconsistent on here and on the de-version (see ]). I think I can see why (the en-version is an earlier, 'years active' range and later research has uncovered the more precise dates in the de-version). But I'm not 100% sure, so leaving it here so others can see what they think. I also asked about this (old page version of an editor assistance request, dynamic version that will be archived is ]). ] (]) 10:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
The birth and death years are inconsistent on here and on the de-version (see ]). I think I can see why (the en-version is an earlier, 'years active' range and later research has uncovered the more precise dates in the de-version). But I'm not 100% sure, so leaving it here so others can see what they think. I also asked about this (old page version of an editor assistance request, dynamic version that will be archived is ]). ] (]) 10:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
:It appears the German WP is relying on von Liliencron (tho it's not explicitly cited to the b/d dates). Have you asked if anybody has a copy & can read German, to confirm? ] ]</font> 10:44, 3 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
:It appears the German WP is relying on von Liliencron (tho it's not explicitly cited to the b/d dates). Have you asked if anybody has a copy & can read German, to confirm? ] ]</font> 10:44, 3 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::If I notice this problem from the Latin Vicipaedia, as I fairly often do, I tend to assume that de:wiki is more likely to be accurate than en:wiki, but still not enough to trust. In this case, the dates given by de:wiki appear to be borrowed from this . But, crucially, the external page (never mind whether we think it's reliable) puts the word "''um''" ("about") before each date. So in fact the external page isn't vouching for the accuracy of the dates, and it looks to me as if de:wiki shouldn't be doing so either. |
|
|
::For all that, our suggested birth date 1644 seems highly unlikely. If Böckler published a book such as is described at the age of twenty, he was a genius indeed. |
|
|
::No, Trekphiler, the dates don't come from von Liliencron. That article is on wikisource (]) and it dates Böckler vaguely to "second half of the 17th century". <font face="Gill Sans"><font color="green">]</font>''']'''<font color="green">]</font></font> 11:34, 3 July 2012 (UTC) |