This is an archive of past discussions with User:Bossanoven. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi Hoops. Yes, my main focus is translation from German to English Wikipedia, mainly of geographical and historical subjects relating to Lower Saxony. If you have a couple of articles other in mind, let me know and I'll at least get them started. --Bermicourt (talk) 11:36, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Redirects
I've seen you propose a very long list of redirects at WP:AFC/R. They look good to me, and I'll soon begin creating them, but I wondered: Wouldn't it have been easier for all of us if you had just created them yourself? Is there a specific reason for you to submit requests instead? Huon (talk) 11:57, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
The filer of the 3RR also posted to the Admin Noticeboard. Since it was a post to an archived thread, I started a new thread here with the user's posting. -OberRanks (talk) 22:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I just wonder why did you revert my edit to Pink Floyd albums template such as this? I just made all colors same and it was very beautifuk, it is hard to read in this way you did and it's very bad-looking. Nima1024 (talk) 19:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
But I still think that standard blue template is very very much more beautiful than this colourful, for example the first album or Animals or Dark side is not readable, The Wall is good but overall it's ugly :( Nima1024 (talk) 08:54, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
photo adjustments
Hoops, if you have not read it: as to your photo adjustments query on my talk page; another editor just wrote as to a solution to try; see what you think therein and give it a try. Good luck, Kierzek (talk) 20:02, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
If you're going to unilaterally move or unmove pages [1], despite the apparent consensus and discussion, can you please at the very least bother commenting in the said discussion first? In situations like these an undescriptive edit summary is insufficient. Can you please move the page back and engage in talk first? Thanks.Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:34, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
New categories you have made
Hoops: I believe it is redundant to have new categories of both: "Heinrich Himmler" and "Category: Agencies administered by Heinrich Himmler"; the former is better than the latter; further, it really is mischaracterized to list the: Sicherheitsdienst, Gestapo, Ordnungspolizei, Kriminalpolizei and even the SS-Totenkopfverbände, as having been "administered by" him. They were subordinate departments, in general terms, to Heinrich Himmler in his dual capacities as Chef der Deutschen Polizei (Chief of German Police) and Reichsführer-SS; BUT, Himmler delegated those director positions. Heydrich ran the SD and Gestapo and later Kaltenbrunner and Müller, for example, for those departments. If you wanted to say, "Agencies subordinate to Himmler" that would be better; but with the new category of "Heinrich Himmler", it is really redundant. Think about it. Kierzek (talk) 03:47, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Hoops, the category has been nominated for deletion. I would recommend getting consensus on applicable noticeboards before trying to create new categories in the future. -OberRanks (talk) 16:05, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
You are now edit warring
Hoops, both the Himmler administration category and the Himmler category itself have been challenged as redundant by at least three editors now. Please do not start re-adding them back into articles until this matter is discussed and consensus can be reached. That is straight up edit warring which is totally against Wikipedia policy. -OberRanks (talk) 01:38, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Both categories were brought up for discussion on the deletion entry as redundant. You should visit the German History discussion board and get consensus before going any further. You certainly should not re-add either of those categories into articles from which they have been previously removed. For the record, I'm not going to revert anymore of the re-added categories to avoid myself getting involved in an edit war - I just think you should be careful here. -OberRanks (talk) 01:47, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Your wording is confusing. I hope that you are not suggesting the deletion of the entire category for Himmler. Is the category itself being discussed, or just articles that are included within it? Where?Hoops gza (talk) 02:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
I can be fairly certain the original print wasn't faded and yellowed with age, or had a cyan discolouration on the top left. It is also normal practice to remove the borders of images for use on wikipedia. As such, I am reverting it to the clearer version. If still you have a problem with this, take it up on the image talk page, where we can ask for opinion from other interested parties. (Hohum@) 17:19, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
You might want to consider archiving older posts on your talk page. If for no other reason, it makes people think you're serious about talk page maintenance and answering inquiries. Users who have dozens and hundreds of unarchived talk page entries, going months or years back, tend not be taken as seriously. It might not be right, but on this site its just the way it is. -OberRanks (talk) 10:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Create a page called User talk:Hoops gza/Archive and move about 30-50 posts over to the page. Other archives pages can be named "User talk:Hoops gza/Archive2", "User talk:Hoops gza/Archives3", etc. There is also a way to create a filing cabinet icon, but I've never done that before. -OberRanks (talk) 15:20, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
FYI, Hoops, I see you archived a good part of your old talk page. If you have any other questions about it, here is the instruction page link: Help:Archiving a talk page. I would like to know how to do the filing cabinet, myself. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 01:56, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Note: the archive box works great. You can copy mine, Hoops, if you want to add it. I copied it from OberRanks. I hate reading directions, myself. Kierzek (talk) 19:24, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps I will, thanks. I have learned how to use Wikipedia solely by trying different things out. I have not read any of the directions.Hoops gza (talk) 06:41, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate your efforts to clean up some categories, but you should realize that war crimes and crimes against humanity are not the same thing, nor is one a subtype of the other. They are distinct crimes and are people can be and are charged with and convicted of either or both separately. Some defendants at the Nuremburg Trials were convicted of war crimes; some with crimes against humanity; some with both. Good Ol’factory(talk)09:19, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry about that. It looks like you've already taken care of the cleanup regarding that. I think that there are more Nazis convicted on both counts, and I will be adding some more names to that category shortly.Hoops gza (talk) 10:02, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Nazi Leaders Cat.
Hoops, you removed a number of cats I did as to certain leaders of the Nazi party when they clearly meets the criteria for inclusion. No one else objected; before you think about removal again-take it to the talk page; the burden is on you, as it always is when a party wants to change or remove something added. Also, as I and others have warned you before as to edit-warring in the past, I need not bring it up again. Kierzek (talk) 12:46, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
You added articles to a category in which those articles are already in its subcategories. It is redundant and excessive to add them to both the main category and the more specific category that they perfectly fit the criteria of.Hoops gza (talk) 12:48, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
If that was the criteria, one could go to the list of anyone on "Nazi Leaders", including Hitler, and say there are redundant cats; the query is: does it help the general reader and does that person meet the cat according to sources given in an article. I don't like excess either, as you know, and do not add cats that don't meet the the definition. Kierzek (talk) 13:05, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
There were no redundant cats until you started tagging these certain Nazis with the extra category of Nazi leaders. All of these people were already in one spot (either the main category or a subcategory), which is the way it should be considering how many of them there are.Hoops gza (talk) 13:22, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
This is a warning that you are removing cats without notice and worse without obtaining consensus even after we discussed this at length this morning. Kierzek (talk) 02:26, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Hoops, I'm getting complaints about you. I don't like to get complaints—they are a pain to deal with, and they always lead to trouble. As has been suggested, it's a good idea to not make category edits that have proved to be controversial. I believe you are trying to be helpful and have no ill intent. But it's true that there is no one "correct" way to eliminate category redundancy, and opinions on the matter can differ. So don't edit war and if you're finding persistent resistance to the category edits you are making, maybe it's best to leave it be, or propose doing it on the talk page of the article before you do it. Good Ol’factory(talk)08:22, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Second Holocaust Nav box
Hoops, why are you adding a second Holocaust Nav box to SS-Totenkopfverbände and Concentration Camps Inspectorate when there is already a Holocaust Nav box included at the bottom of each article? If they are not exactly the same (although a quick check appears to show that overall they seem to be so; with the prior Nav box placed at the bottom of the page a little more detailed) then why not change one of the Nav boxes to be all inclusive and just have one box? Do we really need two? BTW-have a good 4th of July. I will be gone the rest of today. Kierzek (talk) 12:07, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I believe my use here is a special case. The two Polish gentlemen who I cite have far more extensive libraries of music (recorded and as sheet music), historical books, newspaper clippings, photographs, ephemera, etc. than any library I know of in the world. They are Polish scholars and collectors who prefer, for some reason, to disseminate what they know via youtube rather than any other source. They have information it would be difficult to find anywhere else. When I asked one of them to hunt for a particular "hit" by Bialistocki, one which was cited in one of my printed Yiddish sources but which I was unable to find in any other source in America, France, or Poland, he came up with it and put it on youtube. If you want to erase what I've written, fine, I"ll be done with Wikipedia at that point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jane Peppler (talk • contribs) 12:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi Hoops. I was certainly hoping to get round to researching this before September; perhaps during August when things quieten down a bit! I haven't forgotten it! Regards, --Bermicourt (talk) 18:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Are singers really a subcat of musicians?
Hi, re your catchanges this particular one might be incorrect. I don't know, I'm asking. What do other Wikipedia categories do? Plácido Domingo is not listed under musicians cat, I'm wondering if anywhere on wikipedia singers are classified as musicians. Can you please check this with admins/category talk? In ictu oculi (talk) 07:58, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Yes, singers (vocalists) are musicians. Their instrument is their vocals. As you can see with Plácido Domingo, the category Spanish singers is a subcategory of Spanish musicians.Hoops gza (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
To be honest, I was not even sure if Opera singers should be kept as a category. That is quite a fine categorization, like violinists or cellists, which are kept under Musicians as it relates to the Holocaust. Opera singers, however, do seem to be a fairly distinct, discrete bunch, so I guess we can keep the category for now.Hoops gza (talk) 08:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Grete Forst
Grete Forst was my grandmother. She did not die in the Vitebsk Ghetto as her biographical entry previously reported, but died at the concentration camp at Maly Trostenets, Belorussia (USSR). This information is based on a List of murdered Jews from Austria found in Namentliche Erfassung der oesterreichischen Holocaustopfer, Dokumentationsarchiv des oesterreichischen Widerstandes (Documentation Centre for Austrian Resistance), Wien. She is listed under her married name, Margarete Schuschny. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julianne69 (talk • contribs) 08:24, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
