User talk:Otto S. Knottnerus

Hello, Otto S. Knottnerus, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for registering an account. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.   Introduction  5   The five pillars of Wikipedia   How to edit a page   Help   Tips   How to write a great article   Manual of Style   Be Bold   Assume Good faith   Get adopted

If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or get instant online help at IRC. You can also place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will come shortly to answer your questions.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:44, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

July 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Coalescence, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place "{{helpme}}" on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
• The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Coalescence was changed by Otto S. Knottnerus (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.876359 on 2012-07-17T13:17:58+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

October 2014

Hello, I'm Mdann52. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Swiss Swedish origin legend— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. --Mdann52talk to me! 11:26, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Mdann52, I would appreciate if you could undo your 'undoing'. The 19th-century dating of the Reichenau Glosses (first half 15th century) has been corrected in 1906 and the glosses apparently are now considered as having been derived from Olai. Moreover, I added a reference to a 1976 study. Otto S. Knottnerus (talk) 14:07, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I did more homework now. This is what Marshall writes: 'Die sog. Reichenauer Glosse (Suecia alias Helvetia, inde Helvici, id est Suetones), die als Beleg für den Anfang des 15 . Jh. von Ernst Ludwig Rochholz, Tell und Gessler, Heilbronn 1877, S. 69, und Vetter, Sage, S.6, angeführt wurde, entstammt einer Papierhandschrift von Emde des 15. Jahrhundert; vgl. schon Franz Joseph Mone, Anzeiger für Kunde der teutschen Vorzeit 3 (1834), 346. QW III 2/2 S. 17 Anm. 35'. Apparently the article contained some more faults, as it was almost solely based on Weibel's 1972 article with some references to Hungerbühlers 1871 edition. By now, I feel free to undo your destructive undoing. Otto S. Knottnerus (talk) 15:32, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dollart, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oldambt. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

January 2016

Hello, I'm Montanabw. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Barn because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Montanabw^(talk) 23:00, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't get the point. I skipped my own article (though relevant), but you skipped the other titles in the literature list.Otto S. Knottnerus (talk) 18:08, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Do you have any idea how many hundred books exist about barns? Start a list article. Montanabw^(talk) 03:38, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, if you only count the titles. Every topic has its few highlighs. And every specialist will miss out on some of them. But if you are so well informed on farm-building history, please improve the list.Otto S. Knottnerus (talk) 03:45, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't see the need for a list at all. I see a need for these works to be used as footnotes and sources to improve the article, because frankly it's also image-heavy and disorganized. If you have expertise in that area, then expand and improve the article. If you feel your own work is a source, post that on the talk page with the page link and snippet so someone who is not you can assess and add it if relevant (I sometimes will do this for people, by the way.) Montanabw^(talk) 05:49, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Donough MacCarthy, 4th Earl of Clancarty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jacobite. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Almenum

Hi, what do you dispute on the Almenum page? It would be best to use the talk:Almenum to describe it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:28, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Otto S. Knottnerus. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gringolet, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clarion (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:22, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Palestinabuch

Hi I’m just reviewing this new article and I have some questions. First, in the lead section you’ve written “which is thought to have changed the world if it had not disappeared.” This is an evaluative statement and it’s not clear what the basis for it is. Can you clarify? Second, your write that Wirth’s biographers never mention this book. Is it the case that the only evidence we have for its existence is the accounts of people who shared Wirth’s general outlook, and that none of them ever read it? Many thanks. Mccapra (talk) 13:16, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi too! As it is with ethnophobic hoaxes, they are often presented as real and potentially world changing. The text gives evidence of influential thinkers who shared this idea. But I'll make the sentence more specific. That there has been a text, corresponding to the Palestinabuch, is proven by Wirth biographies. But it's relative importance is only stated by Serrano and Dugin. Personally, I think the supposed content to which Serrano, Dugin and others refer, are only an projection of Wirth's general idea. I suspect Dugin made the whole story up, on the base of reading Serrano. But as he is considered an authority and I don't read Russian myself, I'm a bit carefull in stating that.Otto S. Knottnerus (talk) 13:30, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

On the other hand, Wirth was an overt antisemite, which may have worried his associates in later life, who value him as an ecological thinker. So there may have been more reasons for letting the manuscript disappear, which would feed the paranoia of a 94-year old nazi.Otto S. Knottnerus (talk) 14:04, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi thanks for that update. I was thinking about the merit of Wikipedia presenting this topic as an actual manuscript/draft book if we don’t have reliable sources to affirm that this material exists, rather than being a looser collection of ideas that might at some time have been contributed to a proposed book. The topic is notable if it’s widely discussed on far right sites, but how we present it matters. What would you think of describing it as an ‘allegedly lost book’ rather than simply a ‘lost book’? Thanks Mccapra (talk) 15:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

That's okay by me.Otto S. Knottnerus (talk) 15:59, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Great thanks for working on it. I'll complete the review now. All the best Mccapra (talk) 18:30, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Aleksandr Dugin

Hello. Regarding this, it would be helpful if you could add an WP:INDY source for the content you added to Aleksandr Dugin. From past experience, I know that articles about fringe topics tend to become walled-gardens. It's helpful to readers if we can point to an outside summary of their works for several reasons. This is also for WP:BLP reasons, since Dugin is still alive. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 21:53, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

I was under the impression that most of these additions were self-referring and obvious. The book is about the subject mentioned. The sentence Palestinabuch has a reference to a page with detailed references. But whatever, I'll copy these references.Otto S. Knottnerus (talk) 22:34, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, I know this may seem overly fussy, but I appreciate it, and I think it is important. As a tertiary source, Wikipedia strongly prefers WP:SECONDARY sources. Neutrally summarizing a primary source is more difficult than it might at first appear, which is why it's always better to use secondary sources when possible. Grayfell (talk) 22:47, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

"Conspiracy media" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Conspiracy media. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 12#Conspiracy media until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:37, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Frisii, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Itinerary.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

List of rulers of Frisia sources

Hey! I read your talk page entry on the list of rulers of Frisia article and I share your frustration. You wrote "much relevant literare, recent articles and handbooks have not not cited." and I am just curious if you have some example. I want to make a relevant and reliably sourced contribution to the article. Thank you in advance! Voy178 (talk) 06:34, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I think there is too much to be done here. Partly rewriting will not resolve the issues of wrongly conceived ideas. Narrrow minded Frisian nationalists have hijacked many English, Frisian and Dutch wikipedia pages and filled them up with near nonsense, and outdated myths, conflating Frisia with the Dutch province of Fryslân, and often writing in a kind of translated Dutch, which reflects the writer's unease with English.

Here, it begins with the troubling definition "rulers of Frisia" and the lacking definition of the area designated as Frisia. And more then that, with unsound definitions of statehood, as the latter hardly apply to medieval times. Frisia belonged to the Carolinean Empire since the 8th century ans stayed there until 1648 and 1810. The whole idea of "Saxon" rule is false etnic ideology. From the 12th to the 16th century foreign rule was only a formal title. The whole idea stinks. Is there a list of rulers of Switserland or of Venice?

I skipped or corrected some of the nonsense on the Dutch page and on related Dutch pages. For the Early Middle Ages see the article Frisii with references to recent volumes by Hines and IJssennagger The Frisian counts have been studied by Dirk Jan Henstra, Friese graafschappen tussen Zwin en Wezer. Een overzicht van de grafelijkheid in middeleeuws Frisia (ca. 700-1200), bezorgd door Anne Tjerk Popkema, [Assen] 2012. He corrected some older misunderstandings.Otto S. Knottnerus (talk) 10:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I think we can work something out. Just look how nice List of rulers in Wales got after it got some attention. By raising the standard and provide citations for every ruler historical entry it's free game to remove what's unsourced or spurious. Voy178 (talk) 17:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

The Dutch page is chaotic, but the relevant information is also there. Generally, there were three kings around 700, and e range of counts and dukes until the 12th/13th century, for every part of Frisia other families; then in the 15th cwntury the different parts were incororated into larger states. And a list of mythical kings, composed in the 16th century,Otto S. Knottnerus (talk) 20:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)