User talk:Mausch

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Mausch, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  - Darwinek 00:38, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Already active in Germany

Thanks Darwinek for you welcome message. Actually, this is a kind of secondary account, as I´m a little bit more active in the German community with the same name. I just use this account if I come along a mistake when comparing articles. Actually, when comparing, it´s more often that I need to correct the German page...;-). It´s just right now that I realized someone posted on this page, so sorry for the long delay in reply. Mausch 17:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of the Denmark Strait

Hello, Mausch, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia!

Thanks for your recent edit to Battle of the Denmark Strait. You are right about the Suffolk opening fire on Bismarck at 1619, but there is no possibility of her having scored a hit. According to the the Naval Staff History The Chase and Sinking of the "Bismarck" (Admiralty report BR 1736, March 1950):

"The Suffolk ... fired six salvos at 1619, mistaking for Bismarck a radar range coming in from an aircraft. She was actually out of gun range .. at the time".

I have taken the liberty of reworking your edit to remove the suggestion of a hit from Suffolk. If you have a problem with this, I am happy to discuss it either here (I have added this page to my Watchlist), or at the article's Talk page. Regards, John Moore 309 21:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks John Moore 309. No, no problem at all. Actually, I appreciate it and that´s why I commented my edit. You may have noticed that I took care in my edit not to actually say that Suffolk did hit. I think however that it is important to mention her firing and distance, just like you did, as readers could suspect a misssing otherwise (like I did). I will add it to the German page, too. Mausch 08:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree entirely. Thanks again for your contributions. Regards, John Moore 309 10:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Whoops! Thanks for correcting my mistake in the times of Suffolk's firing. My source was correct; it was just a transcription error. I must have been falling asleep at the time. Regards, John Moore 309 16:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

You´re welcome. These things happen. I am sure you didn´t believe that the Suffolk would come along the scene some ten hours later just to do some contribution for herself;-) Mausch 09:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] German/English spelling

Hi, thanks for pointing that out. Looking at it now, I'm not quite sure why I did that. I suspect it was simply that I thought it was referring to the English rank, and someone had misspelt it, a common occurance since it is rather a difficult word to get all the vowels in the right order. I'm not sure of any wikipedia convention, but I think you're right to use the German spelling when referring to the German rank. I'll change that back now. Kind regards, Benea 09:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] crossbow article

Could you do me a favor and copyedit the crossbow article. I was heavily involved into editing it, but now I can't improve it any more until my sources arrive. Thank you Wandalstouring 16:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation. Will do, though I´m not a luminary in it. Mausch 19:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] November 2007

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, which wasn't included with your recent edit to Battle of Hampton Roads. Thank you. MBK004 20:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for not having done that now. If you look on my contribution history, you will see, that I do it in 95% of my edits. Mausch 20:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Here's something to keep checking your stats related to this: Edit Summary Usage Calculator-MBK004 20:31, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Ok, feeled 95% turns out to be 86% actually;-) (disregarding 71 for minor edits) - still fair enough, I might think. But I will work to improve it. Mausch 20:36, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
That's all anyone can ask.-MBK004 21:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] de.wikipedia den Rücken gekehrt?

Ich auch. Hier bei en.wikipedia ist's viiiiiel besser, don't you think so? Alles in allem finde ich den Umgangston hier angenehmer. Auch die Admins sind hier kooperativer und führen sich nicht wie Platzhirsche oder eitle WP-Könige auf. Hier spricht man meine Sprache - im wörtlichen wie im übertragenen Sinne. Deine offensichtlich auch, wenn Du Dich bei de.wikipedia sogar hast sperren lassen und nur noch hier zugange bist.
Schönen Gruß
--Fromgermany (talk) 15:27, 18 November 2007 (UTC)