Hello, Kenaz9, 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:
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! Kusma(討論) 22:38, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I will try harder! Kenaz9 19:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly do not accuse me of vandalism when I am making serious edits to this article (much of which was orginally written by me). The "conclusion" section is mostly trivial rubbish and does not belong in a serious encyclopaedia. I am not interested in "consensus" to keep bad material in articles. Adam 08:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
All I read from you is a POV about what is rubbish and what not. The article before was not much more than a stub, now more information was added. I got positive FB for the last chapter so your personal opinion is just that. Feel free to add information and to clean up but please don't delete info others find interesting and useful, thank you! Kenaz9 08:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kenaz. Please make sure wholly understand what vandalism is and is not before you accuse others of it. It can constitute a personal attack to incorrectly label another editor a vandal. Happy editing, --cj | talk 08:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize if I insulted Adam Carr. But what about just deleting a chapter others find useful without even discussing it first? That is quite insulting too...Kenaz9 08:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's not for me to say whether you have insulted Adam; I was just offering advice. If you are keen for a discussion to take place, then please make the effort to partake in one; Adam has stated his position on the discussion page. Moreover, be wary of the three-revert rule.--cj | talk 08:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you would look again you would know that I didn't start it. User Adam Carr started it with just declaring a chapter with SOURCED FACTS as rubbish and deleting it without offering a discussion! Kenaz9 08:29, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You have been reported for violating the three-revert rule. Normally, I would institute the block myself, but I am here involved.--cj | talk 09:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What a joke! Kenaz9 09:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why's that? You were warned.--cj | talk 09:51, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Adam reverted more than I did and didn't got blocked. Play your game alone, I'm outta here, congrats! Kenaz9 10:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Adam was blocked at the same time as you were, also for the same short time. Constant reverting is bad, no matter who is right and who is wrong. I am sure there is some middle ground to be found in your dispute. Happy editing, Kusma(討論) 16:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I could really need help with the last chapter "Prussia today". I don't find it "rubbish" and others seem to find it also quite interesting. I'm still interested in finding a common ground but not in get bullied around. Any ideas? Kenaz9 17:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think that some of the info should stay (for example, about the proposal to name Berlin-Brandenburg "Prussia") and some should go/be rewritten/split into a "Legacy" and a "Trivia" section (Civ 4, placenames are both not very important). I'll comment at Talk:Prussia later today or tomorrow (a bit low on time, and need to think about this first). Don't let this get you down, Kusma(討論) 18:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! For me one of the most impressive bonds over the time is the Iron Cross, that I would like to see staying...Kenaz9 18:22, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have written a long comment at Talk:Prussia with a detailed critique of the list. I think about half of the information should be salvaged and put into the article in a different form, not quite sure yet how. Happy editing, Kusma(討論) 04:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Fritz Klingenberg. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Kingturtle (talk) 03:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Fritz Klingenberg. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Kingturtle (talk) 03:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)