User:JeLuF

JeLuF is a Germany-based contributor of wikipedia. Some say he's showing all the symptoms of a Wikipediholic. He regards himself a member of The Wikipedia Gardening Club. He is one of the Wikipedia:Administrators. Most of the time he follows the principle of Don't write about the things you allways talk about and thus he, despite being a mathematician and computer scientist, writes about Popes, Saints, Emperors, Cities, Geography, Language and other completely different topics.

User page of JeLuF -- Do I realy have to have one?

No, but it's handy as a message site. Do you know enough about the Chatti to do something about that OCR error? As it stands, the page looks sloppy. Taking material from 1911 encyc. is okay, with care--but part of that care is that it should be readable. Vicki Rosenzweig

Hello, I hoped someone might look at it and find the original meaning before I did. Intensive googling makes me think it must be the Ripuarian Franks. JeLuF

Hi -- I changed Edward I the Elder of England back to Edward the Elder -- he's best known this way in English (although I can see Ed the Elder of Eng...except was he king of all England?) Edward the First is someone else. It's fairly common -- for example, in some odd genaologies one sees Charles the Bald as Charles II (Charlemagne being Charles I) -- but that throws off all the other numbers. Is there something odd about the Chatti I should look at? They aren't Ripuarian (or even Salian) Franks. J Hofmann Kemp

The Chatti are no Ripuarian Franks, but probably they formed a kingdom with the ripuarian Franks in the 6th century. (I'm not sure on this, the scan of Britannica on 1911encyclopedia.com is very unclear here.) If this sounds like complete nonsense, take a look at the Chatti article

Just a quick note of thanks for helping to change all those Moon links. I get to go to bed earlier than I expected tonight, thanks! :) Bryan Derksen, Saturday, May 25, 2002

I'm sorry you're going through adding "used on /link Polish wiki/" to all those images--and I hope the "orphaned images" page checks all the 'pedias soon. Cheers, --KQ

I'm leaving the blank Cro-Magnon page, because that is a reasonable Wiki article subject and title. Vicki Rosenzweig

Hi -- I added the war periods to the King of Belgium reign periods. Belgium never surrended in 1914-1918 so there's no doubt Albert I remained King during that time. The case of Leopold III deserves more discussion, I don't know enough to tell, but as far as I know the official government of Belgium never attempted to discard him from the throne, until 1951 when he resigned. So even though Belgium existed only virtually between 1940 and 1944, Leopold III can still be considered a king during this period, IMO. -- FvdP 16:12 Aug 29, 2002 (PDT)

 Rhenish \Rhen"ish\, a. [L. Rhenus the Rhine. ]
    Of or pertaining to the river Rhine; as, Rhenish wine. -- n.
    Rhine wine.

Changed Rhinish back to Rhenish in University of Bonn. Thanks for the other corrections. --John

How could the boxing article pages seem to carry a non partial point of view if the author talks about the boxers defeats as well as their wins, and their trouble with the law? If it was partial, then things like that would not have been written about. Those articles were as non partial as any others. Perhaps you just didn't read them well.

It's not about them being incomplete. They are not neutral. Take Felix Trinidad as an example:

Puerto Rican boxer Felix 'Tito' Trinidad Jr. (January 8, 1971- ), is a boxer who has combined style, bravery and punching power to conquer the hearts of Puerto Rico's 4 million residents.

Style is hard to measure. Some might say he had some, some might say he had not. Who said he did? Can some important reference be given, e.g. some famous boxing commentator? Same for bravery (IMO boxing has more to do with stupidity, but this might co-relate with the fact that I'm not brave at all). Conquer the hearts of 4 million - Really each of them? No Puerto Rican favours another boxer? I doubt it. Perhaps became very famous in Puerto Rico would be a little more neutral. But let's go on:

In 1993, Trinidad travelled to San Diego, California and destroyed the crafty defending world Welterweight champion Maurice Blocker in 2 rounds, in a fight televised by Showtime.

He destroyed him? That means nothing was left of his opponent after the fight?

He was crafty defending and went down after only two rounds? This all is very euphoric and does not concentrate on facts but on celebrating a great boxer. An encyclopedia article should not rate the facts, rating should be left to the reader.

I agree with you that there are lots of facts in these boxer articles. Else I would have proposed to delete them completely. But I think the author of these articles has a lot of knowledge about boxing. I just think that praising the greatness of someone is not the encyclopedia way of writing an article. -- JeLuF

Ta for the Soil pH table that you re-did- I've added it to the main page replacing my original scanned table quercus robur

dont remember where I got it its an old map from turn of the century and public domain Lir 22:09 Nov 7, 2002 (UTC)

Don't you have to wait a week before deleting? Vera Cruz

Yes, Jeluf, you are supposed to wait a week for deleting except vandalism