User talk:Ebralph

Welcome!

Hello Ebralph, 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:

The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
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! --Wikiacc (talk) 14:46, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome and the tipps to look around. Any further ideas and tipps always welcomed.--Ebralph 23:23, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

You got some. nobs 21:38, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You got an answer :-) --Ebralph 21:51, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

More mail. nobs 22:07, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed a burning issue. And needs to palced in proper context. nobs 22:40, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Venona project

Please be advised there is an attempt to re-politicize the Venona project once again with dispute tags and criticicism attacking the government's case against 171 individuals named. Those name have been removed in good faith to the new Signifcance of Venona article where discussion and arguements should be properly heard. If the intent is to re-politicize Venona materials with criticism which may be unfair and unfounded of the government's case, then the previously reverted materials may have to be reinserted for balance, unless a resolution can be found. You input would be appreciated. nobs 00:16, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :)

This is formerly 128.194.54.244. Thanks for the help. As you can probably tell, this is something I feel strongly about. I'm gonna figure out some way to say what I want in this article, and a few others, because I know that what I'm trying to say is the unbiased truth. If that means doing a little research on the obvious, then when I get the time, so be it. BQAggie2004 04:15, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts

Don't tell me what I have time for. Going through a certain set of articles and making quick edits and reverts only ever takes me at most around an hour or so in any particular session I may be able to do in total whereas anything approaching a serious discussion can eat that much at once. I gave a reason already for the revert, in the edit summary. That you don't agree with that brief statement and have the ability to revert on your own part is fine, but there is no concrete expectation of having a particularly in-depth rationale at any one point in time for doing any such thing at this site. If I say I don't have time for it today, don't pester me about it. --TJive 04:49, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Tell me when you bore of the game.

Heavens, what damage I have caused in not illimunating my full rationale exactly when you commanded me to; why users might occasionally be deprived of Dirk's personal argumentations for several hours at a time, for no good reason!

Sorry if I give a bit more consideration to my words than to believe this all a "game"; it's supposed to be about the content, not the process, and most definitely not Twister or Monopoly. I will probably post on the talk page Saturday (as specific as I may afford to be), but it is likely irrelevant at this point. Have fun at your own game but I'm afraid I'm not able to play one. --TJive 19:17, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Translations

You wouldn't happen to be interested in the author that shaped most Germans' view of America more than any other? I'm talking of Karl May and since his works are no longer copyrighted I have started a translation. You can find what I have so far here. My problem is that I'm not a native speaker of English. I can comfortably switch to English with a second's notice, but when I have a German text in front of me and try to translate it to English I often commit germanisms. Your input in this project would be really appreciated...

Article upgrade assistance request (Pre-translation stage)

Seasons Greetings,

This is in reference to a relatively new umbrella article on en-wikipedia named Ceremonial pole. Ceremonial pole is a human tradition since ancient times; either existed in past at some point of time, or still exists in some cultures across global continents from north to south & from east to west. Ceremonial poles are used to symbolize a variety of concepts in several different world cultures.

Through article Ceremonial pole we intend to take encyclopedic note of cultural aspects and festive celebrations around Ceremonial pole as an umbrella article and want to have historical, mythological, anthropological aspects, reverence or worships wherever concerned as a small part.

While Ceremonial poles have a long past and strong presence but usually less discussed subject. Even before we seek translation of this article in global languages, we need to have more encyclopedic information/input about Ceremonial poles from all global cultures and languages. And we seek your assistance in the same.

Since other contributors to the article are insisting for reliable sources and Standard native english; If your contributions get deleted (for some reason like linguistics or may be your information is reliable but unfortunately dosent match expectations of other editors) , please do list the same on Talk:Ceremonial pole page so that other wikipedians may help improve by interlanguage collaborations, and/or some other language wikipedias may be interested in giving more importance to reliablity of information over other factors on their respective wikipedia.

This particular request is being made to you since your user name is listed in Wikipedia:Translators available list.

Thanking you with warm regards Mahitgar (talk) 05:41, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help verify translations of articles from German

Hello Ebralph,

Would you be able to help evaluate the accuracy of translations of Wikipedia articles from German to English Wikipedia?

File:Language icon.svg

This would involve evaluating a translated article on the English Wikipedia by comparing it to the original German article, and marking it "Pass" or "Fail" based on whether the translation faithfully represents the original. Here's the reason for this request:

There are a number of articles on English Wikipedia that were created as machine translations from different languages including German , using the Content Translation tool, sometimes by users with no knowledge of the source language. The config problem that allowed this to happen has since been fixed, but this has left us with a backlog of articles whose accuracy of translation is suspect or unknown, including some articles translated from German. In many cases, other editors have come forward later to copyedit and fix any English grammar or style issues, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the translation is accurate, as factual errors from the original translation may remain. To put it another way: Good English is not the same as good translation.

If you can help out, that would be great. Here's a sample of the articles that need checking:

All you have to do, is compare the English article to the German article, and assess them "Pass" or "Fail" (the {{Pass}} and {{Fail}} templates may be useful here). (Naturally, if you feel like fixing an inaccurate translation and then assessing it, that's even better, but it isn't required.) Also please note that we are assessing accuracy not completeness, so if the English article is much shorter that is okay, as long as whatever has been translated so far is factually accurate.

If you can help, please {{ping}} me here to let me know. You can add your pass/fails above, right next to each link, or you may indicate your results below. Thanks! Mathglot (talk) 06:39, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]