Csanctuary
Welcome edit
Български | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Lietuvių | 한국어 | Magyar | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Suomi | Svenska | Türkçe | 简体中文 | The main embassy page edit
 Getting Started Getting help
 The Commmunity |
 Policies and Guidelines
 Things to do | |
Knoch edit
Per your comments at User_talk:AuthorityTam#Articles for A. E. Knoch and the Concordant Publishing Concern, you might be interested to
See Adolph Ernst Knoch and de:Adolph Ernst Knoch. --AuthorityTam (talk) 16:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
AuthorityTam, I had a look at the article you created -- how did you become aware of the German article, if I may ask? Thanks very much indeed. Also, thanks for the references you added to the Concordant Version article. The neutrality of this article is disputed by a Wiki editor; I think it has to do with the part in the introduction where the Concordant Version is quoted on what distinguishes their work from that of others. I feel that this is essential in understanding what the objectives were in compiling the Version, and that the article itself doesn't draw any conclusions on whether the CPC achieved these objectives or not. What are your thoughts? --Csanctuary (talk) 19:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
- Regarding 'becoming aware of the German article'... Into the search field (way on the left), I typed "Knoch" and hit GO, expecting to be taken to a disambiguation page similar to that for Macmillan. When I realized that "dab" hadn't yet been created, I threw one together (see diff). Later, I realized it's a German name and it occurred to me to search for notable Germans to include in the DAB. Its easy to do that, you just type in the same exact search box but use a prefix of "de:", so in this case I searched for "de:knoch". To my surpise, the very first item at the top of that German dab[1] is the person at issue.
- Regarding Concordant Version... Like you, I don't believe the article Concordant Version deserves tags for tone, NPOV, or notability; its tag for references is (IMHO) still valid. However, at this time, I'm unprepared to champion the article. Frankly, a few good references would make all these controversies go away, and it seems they must exist SOMEWHERE. Do you know anyone with Lexis/Nexis or whatever it is? --AuthorityTam (talk) 15:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
- Regarding 'becoming aware of the German article'... Into the search field (way on the left), I typed "Knoch" and hit GO, expecting to be taken to a disambiguation page similar to that for Macmillan. When I realized that "dab" hadn't yet been created, I threw one together (see diff). Later, I realized it's a German name and it occurred to me to search for notable Germans to include in the DAB. Its easy to do that, you just type in the same exact search box but use a prefix of "de:", so in this case I searched for "de:knoch". To my surpise, the very first item at the top of that German dab[1] is the person at issue.