Soenke Rahn

 

Welcome to Wikipedia, Soenke Rahn! I am Calaka and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Calaka (talk) 04:24, 19 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Soenke Rahn, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  I'^mperator 20:26, 14 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Soenke, I am glad that you have set up a user page in the English Wikipedia. I also received your e-mail. You are correct in pointing out that Luther's followers called themselves "Evangelicals" while the Roman Catholics called them "Lutherans." Some of our older Lutheran Churches still have the word "Evangelical" in their name. As you know, the largest Lutheran denomination (Konfession) in America is called the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. These uses of the word are in line with the old meaning of the word "evangelical" (evangelisch).

You are right, though, about the use of the term "evangelical." It has only been in the last 40 years that the term "evangelical" refers to conservative Protestants, who want to return to a more biblical Christianity.

Hallo, Soenke, ich froh, dass Sie eine Verbraucherseite in der englischen Wikipedia aufgestellt haben. Ich habe auch Ihre E-Mail empfangen. Sie sind richtig weisend in darauf hin, dass die Anhänger von Luther sich „Evangelischer“ gerufen hat, während die römischen Katholiken sie „Lutheraner“ gerufen haben. Einige von unseren älteren lutherischen Kirchen haben noch das Wort „Evangelischen“ in ihrem Namen. Als Sie wissen, ist die größte Lutheraner Benennung (Konfession) in Amerika die Evangelische lutherische Kirche in Amerika gerufen. Diese Gebräuche des Worts sind in Linie mit der alten Bedeutung des Worts „evangelisch“ (evangelisch).--Drboisclair (talk) 05:46, 17 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

To nominate an article for deletion, see WP:AFD, WP:SPEEDY, or WP:PROD. More information is at Wikipedia:Guide to deletion.

thanks --Soenke Rahn (talk) 11:12, 25 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Probably Evgeny Kovtun (Ковтун), but eight weeks have gone by so the problem has probably been sorted out by now./ Hello again, I have carried on with editing so I am glad to see your own Luther articles have grown. Best wishes.--Felix folio secundus 17:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I am glad that you always give me a line once in a while! I hope you are doing well. Gruesz, David--Drboisclair (talk) 14:13, 26 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Happy Reformation Day and Halloween Night. (-: Sönke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 20:47, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Soenke, und zu dir auch!--Drboisclair (talk) 05:00, 31 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Guten tag. Thank you for your message. Unfortunately, that subject is outside my area of expertise, and I do not believe I can be of much assistance. Good luck to you. Tschüss. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 00:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, (-: --Soenke Rahn (talk) 00:22, 20 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Dear Soenke,

I also thank you for your message. I don't have a strong opinion about this issue. I can appreciate several viewpoints. To me, Audio theatre is a strange term because I think of an actual theatre. Audio drama might work.

Best regards,

RadioBroadcast (talk) 03:17, 20 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much (-: --Soenke Rahn (talk) 03:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Soenke, thank you very much for your message. I hope I will be able to find time to participate more fully in the discussion before too long (too many other commitments at this very moment, however -- Christmas is coming!). May I just say, as quick points for now, though, that

1) I agree with the general principle of there being an "over-arching" article encompassing the whole topic of audio drama / audio fiction;

2) radio drama (by no means dead, whatever may have happened in United States broadcasting!) ought to remain at the heart of that topic, and is sufficiently important IMHO probably to deserve a separate "sub-article" of its own; and

3) I agree very much with User:RadioBroadcast that the chief article should NOT be called "Audio theatre": that just doesn't ring any bells with me (a consumer of "audio" -- mostly radio -- drama for well over 50 years) -- it makes me think of some kind of building, or at the very least of large numbers of listeners gathered in one place, which is not the audio drama experience at all! -- Picapica (talk) 09:21, 21 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much much. I suppose this is an interesting statement. So I placed a link on the discussion site of the audio theatre article to it and I answered there a little bit. Yes Christmas is comming, and I am sorry that this discussion goes up yet, but it was another German User which made pressure, I would say. )-: I placed on the simple english wikipedia the article http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_audio_dramas_in_English_speaking_countries I will enlarge it, step for step. And possibly it could help also. In the moment I use first a catalogue of the BBC of 1996/1997 (I have) and I will see which audio dramas I own and so on. ... I hope that you will have the article on yor watchlist and that you will help possibly later again in the discussion. --- In Flensburg we have a lot of snow in the moment and I must see in the next hour that I will go into the city center to buy the last gifts. (o: In the moment the sun is shining and in the evening the coldness will come again. --- So --- I wish you a merry Christmas, Sönke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 12:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

• Dear Soenke,

Thank you for your message. I think the entry is perfectly valid, and with some expansion could justify its existence. I don't think the article should —or indeed could— be merged with radio drama as the two, to my mind, are quite dissimilar; if a piece is presented for broadcast then it does constitute radio drama, but audio theatre/drama is not presented in quite the same way. Of course, this is all just my opinion!

On the subject of audio drama vs. audio theatre, I'm quite happy with the latter term: the article could be expanded to incorporate instances where live performance has been crafted around soundscapes rather than physical action.

I will be happy to contribute to the discussion. All the best, and Merry Christmas to you, too! Absurdtrousers (talk) 15:38, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much, interesting, I will place a link from the discussion to my page with your statement. I hope you will have such a nice X-mas weather like we have. (o: --- and I wish you a good New Year. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 15:55, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

  Hello. It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on others' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Audio theatre. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 18:04, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello, can you make a mistake correction, because I suppose that you mean that the text is not neutral, I will be neutral. I will made it better, if you make a mistake correction. Some Users means it was a good idea, to contact them, I hope it was not false, because the audio drama - radio drama topic is very small area in the wikipedia an I suppose not a lot wikipedia editors are active on it. )-: And it Christmas will come and I suppose this will take time. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 18:08, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

The "correction" is for you to STOP indiscriminately cross-posting to dozens (hundreds?) of user talk pages. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 18:12, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I will stop them, but should I correct something, because I don't like mistakes or will you make a correction for me? Or erase the messages I placed? Now I am worry that I have made a big mistake. It was my intention to be neutral and to help. I contacted also people I thougt which will have different opinions in this quenstion. But I suppose that this is now enough! --Soenke Rahn (talk) 18:15, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

But thanks that you have placed an statement on my discussion site and especially on the erase discussion. I supose that it is important that native speakers will give a result to this question and not German one like me. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 18:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

(i) The actually wording wasn't too bad -- it was the massively indiscriminate nature of the posting that was the problem. (ii) Even if that wasn't the case, the shear scale of your original posting would mean that trying to change them all would only add to the disruption, not mitigate it. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 18:23, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

I am a little bit confused because I can not place an answer on the last section. Possibly my computer. Now the answer: Yes you are right I suppose. But I thougt that a lot of the User-pages could be dead. I supposed that 95% will be dead. This is very pitty, but I can not be sure in each site and it is not simple to say which one should be it, because I wanted to be neutral. This was the reason. But you are right and I will make new articles on the German wikipedia again. It was not a fun for me to place such messages on User-pages. Have a fine X-mas. (-: --Soenke Rahn (talk) 18:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

(Oh, and 7 posts to a user's talk page in 14 minutes is excessive, distracting & more than a little annoying. Please stop. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 18:28, 22 December 2010 (UTC) )Reply

A statement of him in the summary of his page I have copied on my site: (Undid revision 403740448 by Soenke Rahn (talk)Kindly QUIT BUGGING ME

And statement of him on his site copied to my site:

[Further posts here on the subject of your canvassing will be deleted without comment. If you want to ask questions about it, do so in the thread on your user talk that I created with the warning notice. ...

My answer in my site sorry, --Soenke Rahn (talk) 18:36, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

So I am very sorry, but it is Christmas time and if somebody will say me the same I will say sorry and that I have understand it and so on. By the way I haved stopped some moments before he placed me the message, because I thougt it to my self that this will be enough. So is the life. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 19:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

I have seen the hardcover Geneva Bible. Daniel 4:1 is KJV Daniel 4:4. I think King James or Elizebeth I added the new verses in his/her new bible. You should use another computer. Sonic99 (talk) 03:13, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Anybody knows that KJV used the Geneva Bible. What will help this answer to this question? --Soenke Rahn (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello Soenke. I noticed your useful edits on the William Tyndale page, but I don't think I can agree with your "word for word" translation of Luther's German subjunctive in "Es werde Licht". It can be translated into English as "There shall be light" (not "There will be light" and not "It will be light" which is surely closer to "Es wird Licht", is it not?). The alternative possibility is "Let there be light". As you know, there is no direct subjunctive form of most English verbs, but using "shall" instead of "will" works here, and "Let ....... " is a near-universal way of expressing the subjunctive in English.

Ambrose H. Field (talk) 08:48, 18 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

I look in the moment into my books. I will answer soon. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 09:55, 18 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your attention. I like such discussions, because it will help me to learn better english. (-: To the question. First it is clear, that such translation questions are very difficult. And I would say that it is important to know that Luther wrote in his An Open Letter on Translating (Compare http://www.bible-researcher.com/luther01.html) "We must be guided by their language, by the way they speak, and do our translating accordingly. Then they will understand it and recognize that we are speaking German to them.". So he will say to the english persons (by the way if I have it right in my mind Luther says something, like english is a german dialect, and possibly Germans went to the english isle, long time ago. (-; But it is clear that an english speaking one, must understand this passage as: "Then they will understand it and recognize that we are speaking English to them." ) So a new translation would be difficult, beause Tyndale take or gives the common translation version. And I would say that Tyndales translation of "Es werde Licht" was in Luthers sense. (in Luthers Sinne war).

But I think for the quesiton of relations to Luther translation it would be also interesting to look for a word for word translation, which would understandable for an English speaking person, but possibly not common. (By the way David Daniell made in one of his books a translation of a very important Bible passage which, was not a word for word translation and was not understandable. So it was possible to say the relations to Luther are not very big. I think such comparisons will not help.)

1. How I made my translation? I looked into the 1545 version of the Lutherbible, to be sure that it was Luthers version. There is to read: "Es werde Liecht".

2. Next step a first word for word translation, which would be possibly not understandable. Es = ist (etymological correct translation), werden = will (or not so similar and not in the sense of the Tyndale translation algorithm, I would say: become) -- By the way Tyndale used in his translation the word shall for Luthers sollen. (which would be the imperativ). The Next word would be the noun light.

3. So the translation would be: It will light. But this translation could be a problem because, I think it is not really understandable and Tyndale used in Mathew 5. ligheteth for German leuchten. So it could be possible that it would be not clear, that light is in Luthers translation the noun "Licht". So I made the translation: "It will be light."

4. Differences betwenn Luther's and Tyndale's if you want to overinterpret each word: Tyndale used the word "there" which will give a position. A more than overinterpret thinking would be to say "it = es", will say that there exists something which would be transformed. "We will say in German such sentences like. "Es sollte was getan werden." (It should be something done.), which would not mean that there exists something, which should be transformed. (Ok, a position could be also something, and so on and so on.) (Not an important question.)

5. So, I would say that Luthers and Tyndales translation will say to 100 percent the same.

Ok, after your message to me I have used google: ""It will be light", This phrase was found: "ca." "576.000 times". So this phrase must be understandable. And I found this: http://bible.cc/zechariah/14-7.htm There you can see several English translation to Zechariah 14:7.

Ok this Zechariah 14:7 was not transalted by Tyndale. The Luthers Translation of Sacharja is: .... vnd vmb den abend wirds liecht sein. (spelling Luther Bible 1545) - and "und auch um den Abend wird es licht sein" (Luther Bible Revision 1984 - modern spelling) (In the modern version I suppose is an error. It must be "Licht" and not "licht". But this is a question of the German spelling. I will ask later today a professor on the Flensburg university, what he will thing.) So it is the same phrase like Genesis 1,3. In the German version you will have in Zechariah 14:7 as an addition the word "sein". (Futur I)

The most English translations shown on the site above are: there will be light. Sometimes "shall be ..."

- But you will find: it will still be light (New Living Translation) - And: it will be light. (Bible in Basic English)

To the other translations: "Let there be light" would be word for word translated into German: "Lasse dort Licht sein". And "There shall be light" = "Dort soll Licht sein". (I suppose that this is the imperativ).

Now I must hurry away. I must go to the university. (I hope that are not to much errors in my English, but the time goes by.) But I will underline, that this passage will not give really a hint to the the relation between Luther and Tyndale. Both translations will give the same sense.

I hope you will write me again. with friendly greetings, Soenke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 11:54, 18 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. That certainly helps my understanding of the variety of translations here, and of Luther's in particular.

Best wishes, Ambrose H. Field (talk) 07:26, 19 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ok, to make it understandable how such translations working was my aim, which is very difficult. (-: --Soenke Rahn (talk) 10:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

A little note for me: http://de.bab.la/konjugieren/englisch/light --Soenke Rahn (talk) 11:35, 19 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Title screen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page C64 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:49, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Changed. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 17:00, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Flensburg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Steamer. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 9 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

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) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nordertor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page German. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 29 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for creating Mainhatttan, Soenke Rahn!

Wikipedia editor WikiEditCrunch just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for the page!

To reply, leave a comment on WikiEditCrunch's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hollie Chapman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hollie Chapman until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. –Davey2010^Talk 20:10, 25 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm Davey2010. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hollie Chapman that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. –Davey2010^Talk 16:52, 26 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Comments such as yours over at the AFD are wholly unacceptable, Wikipedia:Comment on content, not on the contributor, In future please keep comments such as those off this site, You're more than welcome to comment on the content but questioning my or other editors competence all over WP:Citing IMDB is not on, You disagree with that page and that's fine but as I said please keep the incompetence crap off of Wikipedia, Thank you. –Davey2010^Talk 16:55, 26 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I don't like to argue. There was no personal Attack. And I know that the wikipedia is sometimes not funny, but it should be good to see what you have erased on the article. The admin will see it and then he will say you are right or not. Transparence. However. However, I have to do in the German Wikipedia. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 17:09, 26 February 2018 (UTC)Reply