Talk:O Sanctissima
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] O dear!
So much work by an anonymous editor, 62.143.27.49. So much typing, so much information added, so many edits. I can only imagine the amount of work, even if it was, as it seems, cut and paste. A lot of care went into this. But as it stand, in its current format, so inappropriate for Wikipedia. O dear. What to do? It looks like there is good information which should be preserved. Thank you, 62.143.27.49, for all your work. Now, can it be cleaned up? Sean Lotz talk 22:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replay from author of additions: 1. the beginning of article as I first time saw it in scientific terms is RIDICULOUS, that is of so POOR content-quality, that I first thought it NOT WORTHWILE to spend ANY effort! Even QUALITY of informations gathered from the web in general is RATHER POOR!!! 2. Please, I do not quite understand, whether your talk is just "kidding around" - BECAUSE MY ADDITIONS ARE UP TO EXTENDED SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS. If you INSIST on QUALITY-DISCUSSION - I simply can REMOVE ALL - and let the rest of internet get lost in VANITY and even STUPIDITY. NO PROBLEM for my self-esteem, because I AM FAMOUS ALREADY FOR MY QUALITY and RECOGNIZED BY INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTES - not just by any. And very sorry: THIS MAY NOT BE THE LEVEL OF DISCUSSION I am USED to - or thatcan produce PROCEEDINGS. 3. If you have SPECIFIC information - and please: ONLY specific information - read FIRST my additions and feel free to share your KNOWLEDGE, such for instance on ORIGIN and AGE of "O sanctissima", Latin version! (Supposed you have a propper command of LATIN and history of medieval liturgical poetry??!!) Sorry again: THIS IS NOT MY LINE OF OPERATION, and if you or anyone else continues to DISAGREE, we will depart without regret, but DEPART!

