User talk:Daanschr/Archive 2005

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

How to edit a page
Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
Naming conventions
Manual of Style
Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Phroziac (talk) 19:03, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hoi Daan! R adiant _>|< 00:33, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Weber

Sure, a subarticle may be useful. Basically you have to decide which info is important enough to belong to the main article, and which would be of interest only to those specifically wanting to research Weber and German politics and thus should be moved to separate article. Be bold, it is your choice, just remember to add the book you are using to reference section of the related articles. I find your additions very interesting, this is a side of old Max that I didn't knew about... Welcome to wiki, and take care! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 19:14, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments regarding your recent edit. First, communism did exist before Russian revolution, it was a term introduced by Marx in mid-1850, and AFAIK there is a consensut that Weber was anti-Marxist (thus anti-communist). Why did you deleted this part: "Even more damning from Weber's point of view, the command economy required of a communist state would increase bureaucratization, and result in even less freedom for the individual. Germany required strong charismatic leadership, not more burueacracy." and "He opposed the social-democratic party because of the socialists' lack of nationalism." And you need to work on your language - 'evil' is as NPOV as it comes (especially if you phrase it like you did: 'the anarchists are evil' - it is definetly non-encyclopedic). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 23:49, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Testing

Kort verhaaltje over geschiedenis.

Historical atlas

Hi, I have given the wikimaps project away (to Egil Kvaleberg), since I don not have the time to maintain it myself. I suppose you are refering to that. So, I'm afraid I won't be much help with a historical atlas project. --Magnus Manske 07:44, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

(copy of answer on my used page)

I'm afraid the Wikimap project is at a halt for the time being. Not out of lack of interest, but my Wikitime is currently in a state of 'deinal of service'. -- Egil 03:45, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

History of the World

Hello Daanschr,

I went to the blog you sent. Did you notice this person is from Leiden? I sent him an invitation to join the discussion. There are a surprisingly small number of people actively interested in the article. In the past I did not gain support from the other (two) participants, one of which is the original writer (User:SimonP). I added some small additions and they were removed. RCSB 21:10, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daanschr. Have you decided to rewrite History of the World? Before reading Ponting? I would need to take a VERY BIG breath before embarking on such a project. It is much easier for you, I think, because you are very erudite in history. That's my impression from perusing your contributions. For myself history is just an interest; and I'm interested really in the large-scale view and therefore I don't have the factual knowledge needed for challenging an established article. I could do it, but I would need to do a lot of research. In the past, as I told you, I only tried to make minor adjustments to the article. But you are absolutely right that it needs a massive reworking and generally I agree with your views. So I don't want to say "Let's do it!" and then disappoint. But if you are intent on doing this with or without anybone else, then I will be willing to help where I can. RCSB 18:00, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and revise it. Unfortunately I don't have enough time right now for such a big project. I will help if I can. RCSB 08:16, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I might have accidently deleted some text as we were both writing at the same time sorry ill step out of the kitchen. Please use the main template instead of linking section headers per MoS thanks. --Stbalbach 16:53, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I think its ok, seems to be a commonly held narrative/model, less academic than along specialist field names. --17:03, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

John II, Count of Hainaut

You recently added this text to Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals: "The data of John II, Count of Hainaut is probably not correct. He succeeded Margaret II, Countess of Flanders and not John I, Count of Hainaut. John II was actually John I, so the name of the article should be changed." I just want to tell you that such comments should be left on the article's talk page, which is where I moved it to. The WikiProject Stub sorting is about the creation and use of stub templates and categories. Aecis ^{Mr. Mojo risin'} 13:00, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]