User talk:DBaba

Why, hello! My name is Rupicola peruvianus and I reside in the cloud forests of the Andes.

So are we just going to have a staring contest, or are you going to leave a comment?

Archives

/Archive 1
/Archive 2
/Archive 3
/Archive 4

Thank you!

Dear DBaba Please accept my apologies for not getting back sooner. Thank so very much for your compliments! I’ve been working on the Nolte page on and off for the last four years since I started it way back in July 2005, and it does make me happy that somebody else other then myself has some interest in Herr Doctoker Nolte. I might have a small quibble here or there, but overall I think your improvements are a help to the page. Thank so much for your kind words! --A.S. Brown (talk) 05:01, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

David Irving

I notice thta you have made a number of changes today to this article without any edit descriptions. Some of these have involved changing the contents of quotations form Lipstadt's book, such as the spelling of "wilful" and replacing "blinkers" with "blinders". Could you please confirmed that you checked the book before making these changes, or have otherwise verified that the new phrasing is the accurate one? Thanks.--Peter cohen (talk) 20:41, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe these were errors on my part. I googled the quote with the word "blinders" and found it, but it appears that "blinkers" was in the original text. DBaba (talk) 20:47, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing this. i wasn't sure whetehr there were differences between British and American Englich that were relevant here.--Peter cohen (talk) 21:36, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this was the cause of my error. My spellchecker picked up 'wilful', which I did not realize was a British English spelling; and I have never seen "blinkers" used in that way, as the more commonly used term in American English is "blinders". Nice catches! Cheers, DBaba (talk) 22:27, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The funny thing is Lipstadt is American, isn't she?--Peter cohen (talk) 22:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha go figure. I guess if it's outside quotation marks in a Brit's article it's 'wilful'. My cultural-imperialist urges notwithstanding, I yield. DBaba (talk) 22:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Erich Feigl

I left a message here. Discussion towards productive compromises are better than making one click reverts to justify dogmatic views. The edit history isn't for discussion. Xaghan (talk) 14:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC) reverting without discussion especially when there is a discussion ongoing and accusing editors in the edit history of bigotry is vandalism and doesn't assume good faith. Xaghan (talk) 12:39, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]