User talk:Tridesch
Welcome to the Wikipedia, Tridesch
If I made any mistakes on Norse mythology-articles, it certainly wasn't deliberate. Mostly, I used the Encyclopedia Mythica to add to the existing articles. Keep in mind, though, that there are numerous alternate versions of many aspects of Norse mythology. Tokerboy 01:23 Nov 2, 2002 (UTC)
Tridesch says Yes and im sure many of them explain the Valkryor as Vampires - lol what sources have you been reading, but thanks for your input - tridesch
Tridesch says:
Mav, Im dissapointed - you have to make BOLD changes. Havent you read the policies? You should have also takenout "colonization" and replaced it with 'visiting for tea' or something. "Colonization" is a harsh word, dont you think - I do. It usually implies that something bad happened. You know, tendencies like yours are why they found it necessary to to put the 1911 Britannica online, and why they say its the best - because it doesnt present everything through a rose colored moniter glass. One can see why you might find it necessary to hand down your judgements on topics you actually have any interest in, but sifting through all articles, (warping rules i have read, but which you apparently have your own take on), well that corrupts the process of all actual interested parties attempting to form a consensus opinion. I can tell you add information to tonnes of articlea on subjects you havent even the slightest degree of abilty in. If you know anything about northern Ireland that you havent caught on the nightly news with fred and buffy, id be surprised.
- Your condensending attitude and personal attacks do nothing to support your stance - quite the opposite I might add. Perhaps a reading of Wikipetiquette is in order. Be bold in updating pages is a rule to consider, not a policy. The 1911 encyclopedia Britannica was placed online because it is in the public domain and therefore cheap. It is filled with highly POV Victorian prose. But that dosen't have anything to do with the matter at hand. Colonization is a well-defined concept and a term of encyclopedic interest. Some view it as good, others view it as bad. Words like brutal only have one meaning - a highly POV one. -- mav
Please read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view for an understanding of what NPOV means in the Wikipedia. -- Zoe 23:42 Nov 25, 2002 (UTC)
Tridesch says - Im starting your fanclub Zoe. Im just positive there will be an almost endless waiting list for membership given the hundreds of more intelligent-more-qualified-than-you types whos articles youve um 'perfected'.
Please read objectiv history works, not only Hungarian-related ones, concerning Romanian history. Bogdan Stanciu
Tridesch says Ok, have it your way. Romanians are descended from the roman legions (and still wear togas to work) - utter nonsense. You are a moron fascist - youre articles nothing but extremist nationalistic drivel.
---
Please try to be collegial, or no one will want to deal with you. -- Zoe
Tridesch says If youve been to college, .... lol
I agree 150%, Zoe. Just look at his comments in Talk:List of country name etymologies. Recently he has taken to posting anonymously so that nobody will see his bad rating. Junesun
Tridesch says: Spare me - I see you dont like the etymology page. If i post anonymously its becasue its easier than signing in. Everything ive written is 100% correct - although maybe Zoe was right about Sarah Michelle Gellar getting an Oscar - ill have to check lol
---
Gee, I come here to compliment you on your obnoxious attitude, and all I see are other people who have already commented on it. Maybe you need to take a look at your attitude? RickK 03:05, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Tridesch says: you should take a look in book - of course after you contribute to any article, that would seem to be your preferred method.
Take a look at my user page to see which articles I've created and modified. And then point to the ones you've worked on, other than insulting people on talk pages. RickK 22:07, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Tridesch, please don't put comments like these in the articles:
- note - this preceeding paragraph is considered unacceptable to the most frequent contributor to this article. Of course he never had the benefit of a unbiased education (Raised in Romania of course during its communist dark - how such a person would call his education equal to ours - a mystery?) and will vandalise this page as soon as it is completed.
- Note: Romanian history of course, genrally ethnocentric excludes this Historical timeline, and has ancient Transylvania as having been continuously inhabited by a Latin element from the time of trajan - Of course, one can readily expect the vandalisation of this webpage by Romanian 'journalistic forces' which will undoubtedly result in the this 'continuity theory' making the Whole of Romania the inheritor of ancient Rome' - total drivel but necessary nonetheless to note.
Insulting some of the readers is not part of Wikipedia's policy. Also, the other changes to History of Romania are just a Hungarian nationalist POV, not sustained by any facts.
Please read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view before continuing to modify articles. Bogdan 10:34, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Tridesch says: You know, youre views are not neutral - their naziesqe propaganda. Is writing them into wikipedia part of Wikipedia policy? Perhaps you should spend some tume reading any policy pages you find. Its your own statements that are nationalistic POV. There is not one shred of proof supporting continuity and every evidence that it is false. Apparently, my statements about your impending vandalism were also valid because hey - its just what you did. Im sick of you altering Romanian history to fit your nationalistic sensibilities. Have you thought at all about the strange history youre writng - how idiotic it is? You are an imbecile thug. Im eminently more qulified to write on any historical topic than you, the yellow journalism expert. I dare you to ask any European history professor not located in Romania or Moldova or some other educatianlly starved Balkan-Carpathian regime what the correct view of Romanian history is, and theylle all be unamimous.
- The best thing to do would be to create together a page Romanian continuity (linked from History of Romania) with arguments pro and contra this theory, everything written in NPOV. How's this proposal ? Bogdan 20:26, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Zoe's gone. Bit rude to say such things behind her back, eh? Martin 23:37, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Highness, user's individual comments in their talk pages really werent meant for you to remove. Tridesch
Perhaps true, but I thought you'd left, and I didn't want to leave fossilised arguments hanging round the place - why preserve an argument between you and Zoe when Zoe has gone home and you apparently no longer edit? Since you're still here, perhaps I could ask you to edit your page not to attack Zoe? As I said, it does seem a little rude to criticise her after she's no longer here. Martin 18:05, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)