User talk:Saiht

Welcome!

Hello, Saiht, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Textual variants in the NT[edit]

Nice work. What do you think abour "Textual variants"? In last time I expanded Unzial 070, Minuskel 1 and Minuskel 2. Can you correct them? Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 11:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course! I had a look at this three articles and did minor corrections. As for Textual variants - I guess, SkyWriter is right - it is an tremendous work! Only to list the Nestle-Aland would be 15.000 entries. Maybe you find a system how to limit the amount of the list. I did a first translation, but will do the entire translation only step by step. I like the idea to give the english (german) translation behind the greek text, because not everyone is familiar with this alphabet (nor the language). Nonetheless I think this list is helpfull to have an idea what textual variants really means and that the meaning has'nt changed over the centuries. And I enjoy the teamwork with you, although I can't support Wikipedia in a big amount. --Saiht (talk) 09:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We can discuss about criterias. For instance variations which will explain differences between modern versions of the Bible. It can be usefull for many readers of wikipedia. I want to buy this Comprehensive New Testament book, Skywriter is the author of it. As you well know German Theology (and Philosophy) is different than American. For German scholars Caesaean text is only hypothetical (Aland). There are no supporters of the Byzantine text-type among German scholars, but some of American scholars prefer this text. Today I found very good article on de-wiki de:Littera Florentina. It can be used as example for us how to write the manuscript's articles. I made some erros in "minuscule 2". Usually I create articles on the basis the last created article (in that particular case it was Minuscule 1). Usually it works, and it is good way for speedy creating of new articles, but sometimes I not carefull enough and a something from the former article still remain in new created article. I do not know if you know Gregory, but I can give example of its text. Minuscule 150:

150. ₁₅₀ ε107: Rom, Vat. PaL Gr. 189.

11. Jhdt (Birch 12.), 11,6x8,7, Perg, 331 Bl, 1 Sp (7,3x4,7), 23 Z; gr Bchst gold; Kan-L, Vorw, Arg, Kap-L, Abs, Kan, Lit, Auf, Syn, Men, Unters, στίχ, Vers, Bild (Mk βάπτισμα ις nackt): Ev. Birch u. Scholz vergl sie. G.9.Apr.1886.

A lot of abbreviations. The last "G.9.Apr.1886." means "Gregory vergl sie in 9 April 1886. "Kan-L" means "Eusebian tables", "Kap-L" - "tables of κεφαλαια" or "lists of κεφαλαια". What is better? In English literature I saw both. I prefer "tables of κεφαλαια" (here is example of this table or list). If you think in German it will beter to use "lists", you can change it. I only understand German, maybe in 30%. "Abs" means "Ammonian Sectins", "Kan" means "Eusebian Canons", etc. Gregory is very usefull. Almost the same detailes, abbreviated in different way, you can find in book of Scrivener "A Plain Introduction..." 4th edition from 1894 (I use reprint from 2005 - I bought it two weeks ago). Gregory is more detailed in case of size, not only size of the pages, but sometimes also size of the text (like in codex 150). Scrivener is more detailed in historical material. Only sometimes Gregory gave more historical detailes. So I wish nice work for you. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 18:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I don't know the book of Gregory. The book of Scrivener I found at books.google.com and downloaded it. Yet I did'nt found the book of Gregory in the internet. Although it is old enough that it's copyright expired - noone scanned it so far. I think, for the first time it is my goal to add all articles about papyri and uncials to the german wikipedia. By the time they will be expanded. I'm only stepping in to all this manuscripts since beginning of this year. Therefore I don't know any greek word. As for the mentioned picture "lists of κεφαλαια" I think the german word "Liste" is best fitting. Sometimes I have a look in the english article and then expand the german one (for example de:Codex Borgianus). It's the same, if in an english article the sentence of text-type and category is doubled.

There is a speciality in the german wikipedia: They are very concious about the relevance of an article. Very often they argue "not relevant" or "read: what wikikedia is not" and delete it. Usually it can be compensated with a certain amount of information. So far noone suggested the deletion of any papyrus or uncial, but at least when we try to write about all 2883 lectionaries I'm shure someone will, if we don't have at least a picture of this manuscript. It's the same for Textual variants in the NT. The amount of different readings would suite an extra article for every book/gospel/epistel and take a long time. I'm going to translate more and more of your english data into the german one and will see, what will happen. First thing they did was moving the article to the general lemma Textual variants. Now all NT texts are only examples and not a list of the relevant parts where different readings appear. Well, as I said - let's see ... Whishing you a nice work too! :-) --Saiht (talk) 10:17, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a big difference between 2nd and 4th edition of Scrivener's "A Plain Introduction...". In 1861 he used the manuscripts used by Scholz and a few more. It had not so much detailes and historical equipment. But 3rd edition (4th is the same) it was monumental work, quoted by authors even to the present day. Here is the 2nd volume from "A Plain..." (not complete). In book of Aland we can find only:

F^e 09 Codex Borelianus, e +, IX, 204 Bl., 2 Sp., 19 + Z., 28,5 x 22 cm, Utrecht, Univ. Bibl. Ms 1. (156 (1), 78 (1/2), 0 (2), 11 (S); bysantinischer Text, Kategorie V).

Kurt Aland, Der Text des Neues Testaments, 2 Auflage, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart 1989, S. 119.

F^e 09 Codex Borelianus, e †, ninth, 204 ff., 2 cols., 19 + ll., 28.5 x 22 cm, Utrecht: Rijksuniversiteits Bibliothek Ms 1. (156¹, 78^1/2, 0², 11^S; Bysantine text, category V).

Kurt Aland, The Text of the New Testament: An Introductin to..., William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995, p. 110.

In English translation made by Erroll F. Rhodes (1995) everything is the same, only some additional material from the end - Erganzungen und Nachtrage (S. 321 ff) - was moved to the main text (e.g. Papyri 89-96, Uncials 0275-0299, etc). Unfortunatelly Rhodes made some errors, usually omissions, and sometimes I look to German original book, though in footnotes English is cited. Of course on de-wiki should be original book (and on pl-wiki, fr-wiki, ru-wiki). I will do that. I see English translation is not so good as I thought before. It has some advantages: Rijksuniversiteits Bibliothek (original name), † instead of +, but in biblical references it has some omisions (e.g. "John 4:36-5:11"). Somebody wants to expand "Western non-interpolations". It is good, we will have professional wikipedia. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 11:34, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ru:Список папирусов Нового Завета[edit]

Congratulations!!! You are good. Two days ago I foud this

W. H. Ferrar, A Collation of Four Important Manuscripts of the Gospels, ed. T. K. Abbott, (Dublin, 1877)

Yesterday i ordered four new books (two of them of the authorship of Lake - with texts of collated manuscripts; book of Wisse). Today I have discovered another usefull book: "S. Porter, New Testament Greek Papyri and Parchments (Vienna 2008)." It is accessible in Amazon. I will order it in the next months. So we can expand these articles. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 22:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'll expand the article within the next days. And I still have to translate your aditional paragraph here in the english wikipedia about the discovery of the papyri by the time. In the russian wikipedia user LongBowMan is already suspicious if my contributions are helpfull or harmfull ... due to my lack of language skills. Let's hope he's not deleting everythink.

As for the book of Caspar Rene Gregory - I have a friend in a huge library in Berlin, maybe I get his book for some weeks. I did'nt found it in one of the three university libraries in Berlin, there is one copy in the national library in Leipzig - but this is to far from here. If I don't get it, I can still translate your very good english articles and learn a lot in the meantime. Thanks for your work! --Saiht (talk) 20:44, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Elbrus 2000[edit]

A tag has been placed on Elbrus 2000 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. iBen^talk/_contribs 19:22, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This was fast! Expanded the article and linked to pages in the internet as well as the article in russian and german wikipedia. So you might remove the speedy deletion mark. There was already some talk about this processor on the talk page of Elbrus (computer) ... --Saiht (talk) 20:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Wiki2Touch[edit]

The article Wiki2Touch has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Software with no assertion of notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 04:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion has been answered by User:DGG: major software for a major site. A referring article at the page "apfeltalk.de" has 15000 views. So far I don't have numbers how often it has been installed, but on wiki2touchdata.sourceforge.net in the lower right corner the counter shows how often this page has been viewed. And sf.net gives you an option to see how often the database has been downloaded. We are working hard on an update, maybe with pictures (still improving the scripts), then upload the new database dump and in June I'll give you the total number of downloads - place it right here. This is only the number of people downloading the preformated files, not counting all the otheres generating the files themselve. Then you see if it is minor or major software ... --Saiht (talk) 16:57, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Wiki2Touch[edit]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Wiki2Touch. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wiki2Touch. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:13, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Saiht. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Saiht. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]