Euverlèk:Artur Balder

Iech geluif tot veer dees paasj toch mer mote goon weggoeie. Op 38 vaan de iw's (zuuch de historie) is 't artikel gewis, umtot 't crosswiki spam zouw zien. Wat vint geer? - Pahles 21 mrt 2009 20:15 (CET)[reageren]

't Is verdöld good aongepak moot iech zègke, meh op de Ingelse pedia is 't al eweg. In 't raomwerk vaan kwaliteitsverbetering zègk iech jao. ᏎᏖᎢᎾᏆᎮ Op nao de 5.000! 22 mrt 2009 10:53 (CET)[reageren]

Allewel tot heer op d'n Duitse wiki moch blieve, ierlek is ierlek. ᏎᏖᎢᎾᏆᎮ Op nao de 5.000! 22 mrt 2009 10:54 (CET)[reageren]

't Is netuurlek 'nen have Pruus... ;) - Pahles 22 mrt 2009 11:06 (CET)[reageren]

Jeh ok, meh op d'n Duitse wiki vinde ze 'n artikel neet gaw encyclopedisch genoog. Dat deit miech toch wel twievele. ᏎᏖᎢᎾᏆᎮ Op nao de 5.000! 22 mrt 2009 11:12 (CET)[reageren]

Okee, nao twie jaor weurt 't tied veur 'n beslissing. Of v'r wisse 't umtot 't toch zelfpromotie waor en 't veur us niks beteikent, of v'r laote 't stoon en hole 't {delete}-sjabloon eweg. Eur meining? Steinbach 12 jan 2011 23:27 (CET)[reageren]

Veur miech maag 't eweg, e groet deil is volges miech zoewiezoe geformuleerd es 'n meining. - Pahles | zègk 't mer 13 jan 2011 14:26 (CET)[reageren]

Hello, friends. I know, this is not my place. But I did an attempt to rebuild the Artur Balder article, since the common veredict of "selfpromotion" has been cleared out recently with plenty of very important references. I know it is in english, spanish and german, but could be very easy to build a small translation with the most important points, since the number and quality of the references is overwhelming. --Lolox76 14 jan 2011 20:03 (CET)[reageren]