Quantum redactiones paginae "Disputatio:Mahometus Muradus Ildan" differant

Page contents not supported in other languages.
E Vicipaedia
Content deleted Content added
Linea 24: Linea 24:


:The "supporters" are all sockpuppets. It is not the facts ''per se'', but the massive selfpromoting attack on the entire wp-community. In the english edition he has made articles on unpublished manuscripts. I urge, together with wp-friends from several editions, that the entire wp-community stands together in rejecting this. As they said [[:fr:Wikipédia:Pages à supprimer/Mehmet Murat İldan|in the french debate: ]] ''Supprimer! Pour le principe !'' The deletion in english was made by a unregistrated user, probably as a sign of resignation. <br>I have nothing to say against ''this guy'' (in my english discussion page, someone even suggested that my action is caused by hate to all turcs), but I strongly react to his attack on wp --[[:en:User:Orland|en:Orland]] / [[:no:Bruker:Orland|no:Orland]] --[[Usor:80.232.34.55|80.232.34.55]] 20:36, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
:The "supporters" are all sockpuppets. It is not the facts ''per se'', but the massive selfpromoting attack on the entire wp-community. In the english edition he has made articles on unpublished manuscripts. I urge, together with wp-friends from several editions, that the entire wp-community stands together in rejecting this. As they said [[:fr:Wikipédia:Pages à supprimer/Mehmet Murat İldan|in the french debate: ]] ''Supprimer! Pour le principe !'' The deletion in english was made by a unregistrated user, probably as a sign of resignation. <br>I have nothing to say against ''this guy'' (in my english discussion page, someone even suggested that my action is caused by hate to all turcs), but I strongly react to his attack on wp --[[:en:User:Orland|en:Orland]] / [[:no:Bruker:Orland|no:Orland]] --[[Usor:80.232.34.55|80.232.34.55]] 20:36, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

::And some ''facts'': I am a literary critic, and have published one book on childrens literature, in norwegian. This single book gives more hits in google ([http://www.google.no/search?sourceid=navclient&hl=no&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLF,GGLF:1970-01,GGLF:no&q=%22barnas+forfatterleksikon%22]) than his name [http://www.google.no/search?sourceid=navclient&hl=no&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLF,GGLF:1970-01,GGLF:no&q=%22Mehmet+Murat+%c4%b0ldan%22]; and the odds are even worse if you remove the wikipedia hits [http://www.google.no/search?hl=no&rls=GGLF%2CGGLF%3A1970-01%2CGGLF%3Ano&q=%22Mehmet+Murat+%C4%B0ldan%22+-wikipedia&meta=]. (And of course, this comparision is not completely fair, as www is more common in norway than in turkey, but still) --[[:en:User:Orland|en:Orland]] / [[:no:Bruker:Orland|no:Orland]] --[[Usor:80.232.34.55|80.232.34.55]] 20:36, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Emendatio ex 20:42, 25 Ianuarii 2007

Sorry for being sceptical, however, this article (and it's brothers and sisters in other Wikipedias) looks a bit strange to me. I have asked Usor:Cicero (see Disputatio Usoris:Cicero) to provide some extra information (ISBNs, etc.), if possible. --Rolandus 22:05, 19 Novembris 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nomina

Hmmm, since Mehmet and Murat are both attested as Ottoman names, do we maybe want to Latinize to Maomethes Amorathes İldan? I also note that "Shakyamuni" is mentioned in Jesuit descriptions of Japan as Xaca. But I am unsure if that form, being a transcription 釈迦, should be used without reference to Japan. --Iustinus 19:01, 13 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iustine, if Mehmet doesn't equal Mahometus, you might want to tell Wikipedia, which, s.v. Muhammad, says (boldface added): "The name is also transliterated as Mohammad, Mohammed, Mohamed, Muhammed, Mahommed, Mehmed, Mehmet, Mahomet. In Latin, it is Mahometus." IacobusAmor 05:15, 24 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, maybe I'm thinking of Mahmud! But in any case, I can come up with a good rationale for using this rationale instead: there's actually a zillion Latin forms of Mohammed (granted, Mahometus has been my favorite since reading Eichenseer's translation of De Sigaris Pharaonis), and given Mr. İldan is Turkish, why not go with the Ottoman form? (Of course a flaw in this argument is that even for Mehmet there's more than one Latinization, but I like Maomethes because it was used by Christophorus Richerius Thorigneus in De Rebus Turcarum, a book which has a special place in my heart, being the first archaic book I looked up in special collections... this of course was for Wikipedia too ;) ) --Iustinus 05:37, 24 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Heheh, I probably should have mentioned that one such Latinization is mentioned in another article I'm working on right now... ;) --Iustinus 06:28, 24 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete

This article should be deleted. I who call for delete is admin on no:, no:Bruker:Orland. This article is spread to several editions of wp as a extreme self-pr without any reasonable notability

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Personally I'd like to wait and see what other wikis, with larger staffs, decide to do. --Iustinus 23:27, 23 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
{{iocus}}? --Rolandus 23:45, 23 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I missed that you had already called this article into question above. It does look like the French are planning on keeping it though: see fr:Wikipédia:Pages à supprimer/Mehmet Murat İldan --Iustinus 00:04, 24 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re: "wp as a extreme self-pr without any reasonable notability"—looks like he's got several books to his credit, and in several genres, and such an article is accordingly more justifiable than many already in Vicipaedia, non? IacobusAmor 01:04, 24 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are right and I do not have a problem with less relevant things anyway, however, what I really would like to know is, whether that isn't a joke at all. Google does not help in this case: The books deal with Shakespeare, Galilei, Gandhi, Buddha. Millions of hits. These books might be listed at postion 370 or 1520. I gave up. The references are just two sources, in fact. The one might be a fake as well. I am not sure about the second: How can someone add an entry to www.kultur.gov.tr? Funny situation. --Rolandus 01:23, 24 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
the english article is obviously lying about his reputation, as it foresees how his reputation will be in the future. Please note the intro statement "Following his epistolary novel, en:The First Sorrows of Young Werther, he is regarded as a romantic writer", when the book in question is due to be published in february this year. This is indeed prophetic skills by the article's author. When the article also states that this unpublished «The First Sorrows of Young Werther» is his magnum opus, we can easily assume that this author is not notable, yet. --en:Orland 07:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC) --no:Orland 24. jan 2007 kl. 10:57 (CET)
The points to which you object—the prophecy, the epistolary novel, the estimate of the author's reputation—do not appear in Vicipaedia. IacobusAmor 12:34, 24 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Renewed call for deletion

Take a look at en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mehmet Murat İldan. This article is now deleted from almost every wikipedia, due to the aggressive selfpromotion. en:User:Orland / no:Bruker:Orland (admin on no:) --80.232.34.55 19:39, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After heaving read the discussion in the English Wikipedia, I personally do not see a reason to delete this article now. Nobody there has doubts about the correctness of the information. Great! People over there are just complaining - not arguing - about a lack of relevance and argue (!) that the article is or will be deleted from other Wikipedias. Just the supporters of the article provide facts. I'd like to have facts. Who has the expertise to rate this author? Of course we should note, that the article needs better sources and more information. I like the idea that maybe Usor:Cicero translates the English article (Usor:Rolandus/temp/Mehmet Murat İldan) into Latin. This is not an important article, however, I do not see a reason to delete it. --Rolandus 20:21, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are some people around who don't like this guy. The English Wikipedia article was just deleted although deletion is still under discussion. Andrew Dalby 20:25, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The "supporters" are all sockpuppets. It is not the facts per se, but the massive selfpromoting attack on the entire wp-community. In the english edition he has made articles on unpublished manuscripts. I urge, together with wp-friends from several editions, that the entire wp-community stands together in rejecting this. As they said in the french debate: Supprimer! Pour le principe ! The deletion in english was made by a unregistrated user, probably as a sign of resignation.
I have nothing to say against this guy (in my english discussion page, someone even suggested that my action is caused by hate to all turcs), but I strongly react to his attack on wp --en:Orland / no:Orland --80.232.34.55 20:36, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And some facts: I am a literary critic, and have published one book on childrens literature, in norwegian. This single book gives more hits in google ([1]) than his name [2]; and the odds are even worse if you remove the wikipedia hits [3]. (And of course, this comparision is not completely fair, as www is more common in norway than in turkey, but still) --en:Orland / no:Orland --80.232.34.55 20:36, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]