User talk:Danny B.

Descriptivist lexicography

For your information, the English Wiktionary tries to do descriptivist lexicography. That means we try to describe things as they are and as they can be observed, not as someone wishes them to be, even someone employed by the state and paid by the taxpayers. In particular, we do not accept any "authorities" on what is "wrong". I find your repeated reverts e.g. in tchýně unproductive and I ask you to stop. tchýně accurately reports to the reader in a usage note that Pravidla českého pravopisu does not contain "tchýně". However, we do not recognize Pravidla českého pravopisu as a source of right and wrong. We report to the interested reader so that they can make their own decision: if they want to avoid spellings absent from the Pravidla, they will get enough information in our entry to do so. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:48, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

You reverted my changes again, e.g. in tchýně. Please stop. --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:07, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

e-mail

Hello. I replied to your e-mail. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 03:37, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Chýně

Hi. You wrote: "morpheme" *-ýně does not exist at all. Since I know there is a village Chýně near Prague (with a great brewery), could you please explain how you meant it? --Auvajs (talk) 06:45, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Having inconvenient posts removed

Per diff, you asked via email to have a certain thread removed. This does not match the transparency standards I am used to, and I object to the lack of transparency. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:12, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Ok, let us have a look. So once you disagreed with a particular admin's actions, in diff the first thing you posted is "... therefore I ask you to put it back to the state you protected it in or immediatelly resign on the adminship." Wow. Do as I tell you or give up adminship? Well played.

The removed material also included this:

"After our community finally had admin vote rules and he was forced to confirm his adminship, he totally failed in doing so."

This was in reference to cs:Wikislovník:Správci/Potvrzení práv správce Danny B., a vote in which you were desyssopped from the Czech Wiktionary. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:19, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

More e-mails

In User talk:Dan Polansky#Published e-mails, @Dan Polansky advised me not to do anything based on long e-mails. At least, I think it's fair to state here one fact publicly: you have sent me more e-mails today. But if we are to take (or not take) actions on the English Wiktionary, I'm going to agree with Dan and prefer the discussions to be public, not private.

Today, I had published our e-mail conversation without your consent, but assuming that doing it is unacceptable, I removed those page revisions already, and I asked a steward through IRC at #wikimedia-stewards to suppress the affected page revisions. The suppression of page revisions was done successfully, and therefore admins are also unable to read them now.

As you know, when I had deleted one whole discussion in this diff per your request, I used this edit summary: "In an e-mail, Danny B. asked nicely to me to have this information removed from my talk page while kept in the history. I think I'll just remove the whole section, then." I believe it was also fair enough to state publicly the reason why I had chosen to remove that discussion. If I had just deleted it without saying anything, it would probably look like I decided to do it by myself. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 17:14, 15 October 2016 (UTC)