This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rex Germanus (talk | contribs) at 09:34, 5 April 2007 (→that wasnt a personal attack). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 09:34, 5 April 2007 by Rex Germanus (talk | contribs) (→that wasnt a personal attack)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archives |
|
Thanks for visiting my talk page. If you post here, I will reply here so the conversations don't get dis-jointed. If I have posted to your talk page, feel free to post your replies there.
Comments:
- ...
RE:
Done, if you don't mind check this , Antman tries to use his logic that Bohemia was in fact Germany accroding HRE. ≈Tulkolahten≈ 13:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks and I'll check it out.Rex 14:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Tsja
Rex volgens mij is het niet de bedoeling dat je commentaar van anderen van je talk-page afhaalt; zelfs niet als je ze uit de tent proberen te lokken. De opmerkingen zojuist geplaatst zijn heel subtiel om elke vorm van belediging (een reden voor verwijdering) te voorkomen. Er zijn mensen die dat soort edits als een soort vandalisme beschouwen. Laat je niet uitlokken, een nieuwe blok ligt wel heel erg makkelijk in de buurt gezien je recente verleden, gewoon negeren dan houdt het vanzelf op. PS Je mag deze opmerking wat mij betreft direct verwijderen als jou dat beter uitkomt bijvoorbeeld in relatie tot slapende honder wakker maken, ook de reden om dit in het Nederlands te schrijven (Removal of this message is explicitly allowed by the original editors of this message) Arnoutf 18:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Just for the record: as far as I'm concerned, you can remove Antman's messages as much as you like, and I'll also ask him to refrain from posting here as long as he hasn't something really important and constructive to say. At the same time, I'll remind you that if you want to stand any chance of actually keeping the articles the way you want them, you'd better seek constructive discussion with everybody involved. -- Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:50, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Ik heb Antman al tijden geleden gezegd dat ik hem niet om mijn talk-page wil zien. Elke vorm van communicatie gaat gebeuren op de talk-page van het artikel in kwestie, niet op die van mij.Rex 21:51, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007
The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 19:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Stop this, please
Stop accusing me for being nazi crime denialist. --Kurt Leyman 18:39, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- You deny nazi war crimes, of which I have provided proof on your talk page for everyone to see.Rex 18:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
You have not provided any sort of real proof. Now you are merely trying to blackpaint me, especially as I provided reason for my edit on that certain page. And if you wish, a certain convention supports me. --Kurt Leyman 18:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Which convention? The one that says it's okay to attack a citys center with dozens of heavy bombers while the supposed target is a small bridge near the edge of town? Rex 18:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Can I remind both of you that it's not our task at Misplaced Pages to work out what that event was, but only to find out how that event is usually talked about in the relevant literature? Thanks, --Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Dutchman
Good point. I always thought "Dutchman" was neutral at worst, and possibly affectionate, not an ethnic slur. Whoever posted that might have been jumping to the conclusion that any colloquial ethnic identification is automatically a slur. Wahkeenah 15:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed. Perhaps the person who added it didn't understand the meaning of 'slur'.Rex 15:57, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Rollmops correction
I just noticed you reverted my edit (your reversion has been unreverted in the meantime.) Apparantly you took issue with my comment "presumably corrected". I try not to claim things I am not 100% sure of, therefore the "presumably". I am not sure that the word "rollmops" is German, but I am sure that the little evidence I was able to find supports this, whereas I was unable to find support for a dutch origin. If you have a source that demonstrates a dutch origin of the word, I'd be happy to see it. Then we can raid the German rollmops page together, OK? :-) --Lasse Hillerøe Petersen 23:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- No it's my mistake. I was pretty sure I once read the etymology being Dutch, but I'm getting idea it's a folk etymology, although it could be related to rollmop, some vaguely similar scottish dish.Rex 12:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Sinking of the Bismarck
Hello, Rex Germanicus. Thank you for your interest in the The sinking of the Bismarck article. I perceive that you had a problem with the article's former title, Last battle of the battleship Bismarck, since you renamed it to its present title. However you have not posted any explanation of your change. Could you explain, either her or (preferably) on the article's talk page, the reason for your change? Regards, John Moore 309 19:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Be right there.Rex 19:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Personal attack by Lygophile
i didnt make a personal attack. you said fallacies about me, which i pointed out, thank you· Lygophile has spoken 09:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- You said, and that's for everyone to see "You're full of shit", and that's a personal attack. Everything I said about you is true, and can clearly be seen in your edit history.Rex 09:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)