Talk:Capuchin Friary, Rapperswil

Kapuzinerkloster Rapperswil

{moved from [User talk:Roland zh] 01:40, 28 March 2010 HeartofaDog by Roland zh}

Please discuss before reverting my edits again, which are entirely to do with points of English. I appreciate your good intentions, but I am a native speaker and you're not. If you disagree with anything, ask me. HeartofaDog (talk) 01:40, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I appreciate your good intentions, but imho a strange and (very) impolited message, and strange idea of "what wikipedia is":

I did not "revert" your edits now claimed just to do "with points of English" – please see revision history:

13:43, 27 March 2010 HeartofaDog "fix own slip"; 13:40, 27 March 2010 HeartofaDog "copy edits"; 13:25, 27 March 2010 HeartofaDog "moved Kapuzinerkloster Rapperswil to Capuchin Friary, Rapperswil: Englang name".

In fact, i commented my fixes and additions, in a polite manner and as precise and factually correct as possible – as mentioned in version history – by a first edit, please see revision as of 21:33, 27 March 2010, "speaking for itsef", points concerning :

thx :-) some minor fixes/additions: location/fortification, buildings, monastic community. "Kapuzinerkloster Rapperswil" preferred being the "native" term. "friary" reduced as two nuns & guests ;-)

Then i moved/renamed the article by that second edit following the above mentioned one, commenting Kapuzinerkloster Rapperswil as "native name, commonly in use".

From my point of view, and imho in fact, you did revert by your following four edits (revisions as of 01:22 to 01:46, 28 March 2010) – without a previous debate, as expected now by you – my above mentioned fixes and additions, by the author of the article, complaining to fix "points of English" and minor "English points", and moving once again the article (you did not discuss before) to "Capuchin Friary, Rapperswil" :-(

Referring to that minor point, please read the section "naming conventions" at the end.

It should be noted that the article was not written by you, and within wikipedia projects there is usually no need to "ask someone personally" doing some usefull edits respectively additions, especially by the author who created an arcticle and is "native" in its content, p.e.

"monastery" or "abbey", not "friary" linking again to monastery, as nine brothers/monks (friars, in EN-WP article just male) AND two sister/nuns (female) are living there;
the monastery is not a "fortified tower", it is part of the city walls to the west of a fortified tower called Endingertor (that addition you reverted, too);
Einsiedlerhaus (ref. owned by the Einsiedeln Abbey) was removed by you, too;
coord respectively geography was also fixed by my above single edit and in fact reverted by you to that of the Wurmsbach Abbey, as it was wrong when you did your four edits "to do with points of English" ... :-(

These four points were fixed and some minor additions were done by me before and by these (revision as of 01:22 to 01:46, 28 March 2010) four edits, in fact, reverted by you in a false way ...

As you "pointed" in that rude way, i'm not native English speaker, but "native" of Rapperswil and in its history, and (btw) "Kapuzinerkloster Rapperswil" is the native/"official" name/term respcectively commonly used by the convent itself (references are given and the website is also titled "Kapuzinerkloster Rapperswil").

Naming conventions: "monasteries/abbeys/priorys" are imho listed in EN-WP as "CityName Abbey" or "CityName Priory" or "CityName Monastery" and not as "Order Friary/Nunnery, CityName", please see p.e. List of Christian religious houses in Switzerland.

In fact, you listed/'corrected' Kapuzinerkloster Rapperswil in that list as the only one being a "friary" ...

For me personally, this minor point is no reason to be so unpolited :-)

In fact, if there's a really need to do so, it should be renamed (please do so if you agree) "correctly" as Rapperswil Abbey according to that list you also editted as mentioned.

In good faith, anyway, i do wish not to be contacted once again by you in that unpolited way and kindly close my arguments (there are no more argument, and this article will not be edited by me again). Best regards, Roland 06:30 [13:35 edited respectively attempted to clarify], 28 March 2010 (UTC)

(Reply to above)

Well, you're clearly offended, for which I'm very sorry, and obviously you know more about Rapperswil than I do. I was not trying to suggest that you need my approval to write what you like: I simply thought that if we discussed changes we could avoid a possible revert war, and any eventual need for mediation. If you want a more public discussion here, that's fine.
However, on re-reading the history, it still looks to me as though you changed - incorrectly - a lot of my edits on grounds of English language usage ("the Einsiedeln Abbey", etc), and while I don't doubt that I've made some errors of fact, that was in an effort to make sense of what you had written, which was unfortunately not clear in places, and needed to be changed for that reason. I nevertheless apologise for having done so insensitively, and for having been unpolited.
Any other apparent rv's were caused by the fiddliness of reverting wholesale and then trying to restore those points that were correct - clearly, as with the coordinates, I missed some - not intentional.
It's unhelpful, I agree, that in English - unlike German, where "Kloster" covers everything - there is no one single word for all monastic / religious comunities, but such is life. The word "Friary" is in fact the correct one for a community of friars (Capuchins = friars, not monks) but I'm sure it's acceptable to refer to it in the body of the text as a "monastery", if only for variation. It would be totally wrong however to call this "Rapperswil Abbey", unless it's run by an abbot, which AFAIK the Capuchins don't have.
As for the article name, WP:EN is surely quite clear that where there is an English equivalent to a native name, that is what should be used. No English speaker would ever refer to this as Kapuzinerkloster Rapperswil, although there may well be some ambiguity about what English speakers would call it instead. If you are unhappy with the present title I would have no problem with "Rapperswil Priory", if the head of house is a prior. HeartofaDog (talk) 12:54, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you, and from my side all arguments are given. I beg my pardon for the inconveniences and agree that you editted in good intentions respectively in good faith.

Please feel absolutely free to edit as your prefer - i tried by my edit to explain what points are to be correted. Please excuse as we did reply respectively (from my side) edit that page at the same time. Best regards, Roland 13:39, 28 March 2010 (UTC)