User talk:Christian.benesch

Mozart's Verzeichnüß

Dear Christian

Thank you very much for your note on the Zweig page. I am very grateful that you have sorted it out better and updated the URL but I must say that I found your tone of voice rather unkind and patronising. I do know the difference between ss and ß but I did not know how to type one in Wikipedia and I don't have a German keyboard so I went for an easier approach. For most purposes it is close enough that it seems to be understood, at least; and the struggles that I used to have to stop people "correcting" the vowel to an "i" seem to have stopped around the time I made the comment. To equate those attempts to respell it wrongly with my using ss instead of the correct character seems simply unfair to me, allowing no credit for what little I did manage to do with this hint. You could have made the same correction, and it is perfectly appropriate and helpful that you did, without the dig at my efforts. I would be most grateful if you would please consider refactoring your comments into a less confrontational form. This place, believe me, is very much better when people work together in a friendly atmosphere than when they are on each other's backs. Thanks and best wishes, DBaK (talk) 16:23, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear DBak,

(I hope I am using this "talk" feature in the correct way.)

I do apologize for the tone, but your own tone was similar. That people should "check and think" I would consider patronising from someone who actually does not natively speak the language. However, I can sympathise with the trouble you had with people insisting on the 'i's. I think, though, quotes would have deterred them.

That aside, I do not think that Wikipedia should be a place for being petty, and I will edit my comment accordingly.

I thank you that you agree with my improvements and hope you will not hold this incident against me in future.

Would you agree to remove your "check and think" comment? It is bound to annoy native speakers.

--Christian.benesch (talk) 18:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. In fact I've had a go at refactoring the whole thing so it just reflects what is there now, rather than having the ancient history of my griping over the years. Please have a look and see what you think. And if you'd like to remove all this, on the grounds that it is nicer not to be welcomed with bitching - well, it's your talk page: please feel free to zap my comments out of existence. Thanks very much for the very helpful response, which I do very much appreciate, cheers, DBaK (talk) 18:33, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

and thank you very much for the recent and very graceful further redoing of the Talk page. Perfect! Cheers DBaK (talk) 20:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:1949 Viktor Govorov - Gorky reads to Stalin.jpeg

Thank you for uploading File:1949 Viktor Govorov - Gorky reads to Stalin.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:07, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]