User talk:Fred20x

What would you know?

You've been with Wikipedia for a few minutes. What would you know about vandalism? I don't care if Friedrich Fröbel's name has been spelt the ignorant way for ten thousand years by English-speaking ignoramuses. It is still ignorant, and in this age of Unicode, there is no longer any excuse for this kind of pig-ignorance.

You have a hell of a nerve accusing me of vandalism.Kelisi (talk) 06:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I refer you to Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Use_English_words and the more detailed explanation at Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(use_English). Specifically, "Name your pages in English and place the native transliteration on the first line of the article unless the native form is more commonly recognized by readers than the English form. The choice between anglicized and native spellings should follow English usage . . . Sometimes the usual English version will differ somewhat from the local form as in Franz Josef Strauss; and rarely, as with Mount Everest, it will be completely different." Fred20x (talk) 23:37, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Friedrich Wilhelm August Froebel, did not appear to be constructive and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. E Wing (talk) 12:59, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This change was explained on the talk page at Friedrich Wilhelm August Froebel. If you prefer Friedrich Froebel fro the article title that is fine with me but using German umlauts is simply not the usually English spelling for this well know histoical person. If Wikipedia is to be a useful resource for students studying Froebel then it needs to be in step with the usual English usage. Fred20x (talk) 13:16, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you give over? Froebel and Friedrich Froebel redirect to Friedrich Fröbel anyway, and it's highly debatable as to whether "Froebel" or "Fröbel" is "more correct". If you think, for whatever reason, that the form "Fröbel" is likely to hopelessly confuse readers, edit the article and insert the text "(often spelt Froebel)". But it has only been so because printers in English-speaking countries often didn't have the "ö" character in days gone by. Things are different now. No English speaker uttlerly ignorant of German would know how to pronounce either spelling, anyway.

It's /ˈfʀøːbəl/, by the way. Kelisi (talk) 13:31, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course the form "Fröbel" is likely to hopelessly confuse readers, as well you should know. The form Froebel has been widely used in English sources for over 150 years. I suggest you retore the article to Friedrich Froebel, which is precisely where people would expect to find it - and then redirect the others there. This is also in accordance with the Wiki guidelines. Fred20x (talk) 14:21, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is becoming asinine.

Freddie, do you realize that your constant reversions on that page are producing two articles about Friedrich Fröbel? You've taken a running jump over the line separating bold editing from vandalism. Cut it out.

I believe you only created an account so that you could argue about this one article, and so that you could cause trouble. Why are you obsessed with this one article? Hermann Göring's name, for instance, was almost universally spelt "Goering" in the English-speaking world for many years, and yet the WP article spells his name "Göring", and it confuses no-one. I doubt Lübeck confuses anyone, either, and that name has been in the English-speaking consciousness at least since Hanseatic times (longer than "Fröbel"), and yes, it may have once been commonly spelt "Luebeck". The article uses the umlaut, though. Furthermore, Gert Fröbe was commonly credited as "Gert Froebe", but there doesn't even seem to be a mention of this spelling on WP.

I think you know full well that "Fröbel" won't confuse anyone, either. If you actually don't believe that, I suggest you go out onto the street and ask 20 people "Who invented kindergarten?" See how many people can come up with Fröbel's name. I therefore think any argument about recognizable forms is a load of balderdash. Kelisi (talk) 10:09, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I became involved because you moved the article and did not respond to requests to return it to its rightful place. It is precisely because your use of "Fröbel" does confuse everyone that this article should be where it belongs. You seem to be unaware that for 150 years there has been an extensive use of the words Froebel, Froebelian and Kindergarten in the English language. Fred20x (talk) 02:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Freddie, do I really need to point out the obvious flaw in your basic argument? Kelisi (talk) 08:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Message.

Hello, Fred20x. You have new messages at LindsayH's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

And you also have a reply here. Read hearty, bearing in mind that a third user has now designated our banter "childishness". Kelisi (talk) 00:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]