User talk:Eisfbnore/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Eisfbnore, 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! --Saalstin (talk) 19:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oslo Tramway[edit]

Hello, I'm working on the Ullevål Hageby Line at norwegian wp., and I am wondering how I can applicate these

Adamstuen
General information
LocationAdamstuen, Oslo
Norway
Line(s)Ullevål Hageby Line 17 18 
History
Opened1 August 1925

templates there. Since I am new here, I am not so talented at making templates yet. Can some norwegian-speaking admin help me here, or should I ask on norwegian wp? Eisfbnore (talk) 19:13, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{Oslo Tramway next | station = Adamstuen | line17 = yes | west17 = [[Ullevål sykehus (station)|Ullevål sykehus]] | east17 = [[Stensgata (station)|Stensgata]] | westspan17 = 2 | eastspan17 = 2 | line18 = yes |}}

Ullevål Hageby Line
Overview
OwnerKollektivtransportproduksjon
LocaleOslo, Norway
Termini
Service
TypeTramway
SystemOslo Tramway
Services17 18 
Operator(s)Oslo Sporvognsdrift
Rolling stockSL95
History
Opened6 October 1875
Technical
Track gauge1,435 mm (4 ft 8+1⁄2 in)
Operating speed50 kilometres per hour (31 mph)
Route map

Legend
 Rikshospitalet
1999
Gaustadalléen
 Gaustadalléen
1999
Problemveien
 Forskningsparken   
1999
Problemveien
 Universitetet Blindern
light rail to here
street tram onwards
 John Colletts plass
1999
John Colletts plass
(1925–1999)
street tram to here
light rail onwards
Ullevålsalléen
 Ullevål sykehus
1925
Kirkeveien
Stensgata
Thulstrups gate
balloon loop
 Adamstuen
1909
light rail to here
street tram onwards
Stensgata
1909
Sporveisgata
Pilestredet
 Homansbyen Depot
1875
 Bislett
Briskeby Line
 Holtegata
Josefines gate
 Dalbergstien
Homansbyen
Welhavens gate
only to Stortorvet
 Frydenlund
only from Stortorvet
Holbergs plass
Edvard Storms gate (closed)
 
Frederiks gate (planned)
 Tullinløkka
Pilestredet
Tinghuset
balloon loop
 Professor Aschehougs plass
Rosenkrantz' gate
 Grensen
Stortorvet
1875
Karl Johans gate
Vika Line from Stortorvet
 Rådhusplassen
Vika Line to Aker Brygge
 Vestbanestasjonen
1875
This diagram:

{{helpme}}

It is not easy, because those templates use other templates, and so on - all of the templates would have to exist on the other language Wikipedia, for it to work.
One way to see the code that they create is, using special:expandtemplates - if you paste one of them into the top box there, and 'expand' it, the lower box will show the generated code (ie the full code, without using templates).
I think you will need to ask for help on Norwegian Wikipedia though - we can only help with the English WIkipedia side of things, and each language wiki does things their own way.
You could also ask for help on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Norway.
For more help, you can either;
  • Leave a message on my own talk page; OR
  • Use a {{helpme}} - please create a new section at the end of your own talk page, put {{helpme}}, and ask your question - remember to 'sign' your name by putting ~~~~ at the end; OR
  • Talk to us live, with this or this.
The last of those is particularly useful - please try it; pop in now and say hello.  Chzz  ►  19:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you still need help with this, just comment below, and I'll take a look at it. I just ask because it has gone two months and you may have figured it out. Arsenikk (talk) 23:19, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I did ask for it on nowp, but nobody replied, although I did use the {{helpme}} template. I actually lost my interest for it some time ago, but maybe I'll look at it later. Thanks for the help, but I actually did figure out to use navboxes, etc. as I worked with the topic Copenhagen Metro.--Eisfbnore (talk) 12:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Template:Sub-article[edit]

Hi! First of all let me say that I've been admiring the work you've been doing with the Copenhagen Metro in Norwegian:)

I've speedy-deleted {{Sub-article}} as recreation of deleted material after consensus at a discussion. See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 November 12, where there was a clear consensus. If you want to take the matter up for community discussion again, you can do so at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Thank you for you understanding, and happy editing. Arsenikk (talk) 23:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i didn't see your message before now, as the other one you left caught my attention yesterday. To the topic: Nevermind the Sub-article-template, it is not a big case. I must say that I couldn't have made the Copenhagen Metro-article that good without your (indirect) help! I see you have contributed a whole lot to (or written over 50% of ) the articles on the metro here, e.g. the list of stations, the article itself etc., of which I've been translating some to Norwegian. Thanks! I'm now working at a History sub-article (of which 80% is translated from the History-section on German wp), could you take a look at it? Does it have the opportunity to become AA-status as well? Best regards --Eisfbnore (talk) 18:58, 30 June 2010 (UTC) (I also got some inspiration from your signature ;-D)[reply]
Acutally, I've more like written 95% of the Copenhagen Metro article and station list ;) As for the issue about Norwegian AA status, I am not the person to ask, as I actually had to look up what you meant by AA. I do not frequent no.wikipedia at all, as I personally feel I have more to contribute here than there (coverage of Norway is better on the Norwegian than English Wikipedia, would you beleive?). A few quick thoughts, using the standards here at Wikipedia:Good articles: not everything is cited inline, the lead is a bit short (although the norm seems to be shorter in Norwegian; however, most people who read the article will only read the lead, so the less you write there, the less they will read overall, don't worry about duplicating information). Otherwise I can't see much to put my finger on, the prose reads well, the structure is good etc. But I'll leave it to the frequent guests of the Norwegian edition to settle the matter. Arsenikk (talk) 22:05, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the lead could have been a bit longer, you're right. What I'm missing at nowp, is the so-called Wikipedia:Good Topic you have here. We use to call them "artikkelsuiter", but there are no nominations or reviews for them to become awarded, although we have some great topics, e.g. The Faroe Islands. Well then, thanks for your constructive criticism, I'll see what I can do with it. Eisfbnore (talk) 09:44, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Bergen Tramway[edit]

The article Bergen Tramway you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Bergen Tramway for things which need to be addressed. Pyrotec (talk) 08:35, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to review. I will take a look at the article, and adress the issues you mentioned. --Eisfbnore (talk) 07:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I finally got round to reviewing Vestby Station, I'm sorry for the delay. That is also On Hold. Pyrotec (talk) 10:25, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I've improved the two articles and hope they can be passed or given a second review. --Eisfbnore (talk) 20:27, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I still have concerns over Vestby Station (see Talk:Vestby Station/GA1. I've not yet reviewed Bergen Tramway (and I still have to finish my Initial comments): the citations have certainly been improved. I will look at it tommorrow. Pyrotec (talk) 21:29, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ås Station[edit]

Hi. Hope you noticed that Ås Station station went through a good article nomination review about a week ago, and waiting for your feedback. See Talk:Ås Station/GA1. Arsenikk (talk) 10:23, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback given. --Eisfbnore (talk) 20:25, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Vestby Station2.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Vestby Station2.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. MilborneOne (talk) 21:04, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the image does in my opinion increase the reader's understanding of the topic, as (s)he may see that the walkway is build in gluelam (and is modernized). The other picture of the station, from Commons, is actually taken from the walkway, and contributes thus little to the reader's understanding of the article. For instance, User:Pyrotec actually requested a picture of the walkway at Talk:Vestby Station/GA1, and therefore I uploaded the file. I can of course take a picture of the station's walkway later on, but since the Vestby Station is a half-hour train ride away from Oslo, I hope that Vestby Station2.png can exist as a contemporary solution. --Eisfbnore (talk) 21:21, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ridership[edit]

I just though of something that should be included in all the metro station articles: this report (page 33) gives the ridership figures for each station a few years ago, and should be included. If you don't feel like counting stations, the numbers are listed at List of Oslo Metro stations. Arsenikk (talk) 12:34, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will look at it. Ever considered making List of Oslo Metro stations a GT? ;) Only 84 stations left! --Eisfbnore (talk) 12:44, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of establishment category[edit]

In this edit you removed Category:1934 establishments in Norway from the article. Was this intentional? __meco (talk) 19:20, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was. A station is not an "establishment". --Eisfbnore (talk) 21:09, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No they are not, but that is not the sense of the word establishments that the use in these categories signify. It refers to the act of establishing. That is why you will find Category:Railway stations opened in 1934 having Category:Railway stations by year of establishment as its parent category. __meco (talk) 21:26, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
..and won't that lead to double categorising? --Eisfbnore (talk) 21:29, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The term 'established' is used broadly in Wikipedia categorization. Just because 'opened' is a better grammatical term, there is nothing wrong in saying that a station was established in a particular year. For instance, Category:Railway stations opened in 1999 is located in Category:1999 establishments. I see nothing wrong with including the ...in Norway categories, and no, they will not lead to double categorization. The one is related to being a railway station, the other to being in Norway. Arsenikk (talk) 21:41, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
All articles where "establishment" is a relevant property should ideally be categorized under two schemes: 1) establishment by year and type, and 2) establishment by year and place. E.g. a football stadium that was opened in 2000 in Norway would similarly be categorized into both Category:Event venues established in 2000 and Category:2000 establishments in Norway. __meco (talk) 08:08, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your arguments seem convincing; I will re-add the cats. --Eisfbnore (talk) 10:39, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Washington State Route 903/GA1[edit]

Hello, Eisfbnore. You have new messages at Talk:Washington State Route 903/GA1.
Message added 17:50, 7 November 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Out of curiosity, were the recent edits you made to WA 903 necessary? When you use the adj=on or abbr=on function of {{convert}} kilometre isn't spelled out, so adding sp=US is not needed. Also, am I missing something in the MOS that says 222–223 is worse than 222–3? And quotes around one word reference tags? HTML coding suggests you add quotes to all things like the ref name tag. --Admrboltz (talk) 20:38, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I just thought that ref name tags only needed quotes if they had non-A-Z letters. pp. 222–223 is not worse than pp. 222–3, but it think it's unnecessary repeting the page numbers. But feel free to revert me if you think my edit messed up the article. --Eisfbnore talk 21:35, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I am not going to revert the edit, because that would unnecessarily clutter the history and the servers :) Happy editing. --Admrboltz (talk) 22:10, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Washington State Route 223/GA1[edit]

Hello, Eisfbnore. You have new messages at Talk:Washington State Route 223/GA1.
Message added 03:57, 12 November 2010 (UTC)~. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Footnotes[edit]

Thank you so much for your comment on the Henry J. Wood peer review page. I know nothing of the templates you mention, and clicking on the links doesn't get me much further. Could you point me in the direction of a FA page that has such templates as you mention so that I can see them in action and copy accordingly? Best wishes. Tim riley (talk) 18:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you profited from my comment. Mario Vargas Llosa is the only FA with {{harvnb}}-templates that I can think of at the moment, although I also have employed them at the six GA Norwegian rail stations-articles I've written—which are listed in the upper right corner of my userpage. Eisfbnore (talk) 18:55, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taxation in Norway[edit]

Thank you for assessing Taxation in Norway. I would like to improve the article to reach, hopefully, FA-quality and would like to ask for some advices. I realize that the history of taxation in Norway is totally missing, but I'm planning to add this in the near future. Are other important contents missing or do you think the article contain irrelevant material? What should I work on to make Taxation in Norway approach the standards for a B-Class article, GA-Class article, A-Class article and FA-Class article. I would appreciate any advices. Yours sincerely, Carpalim (talk) 12:03, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The prose reads well, and it is well-referenced (although some more scholarly articles would improve even further), so I suggest that you request a peer review at WP:PR before you nominate the article at WP:GAN or WP:FAC. Best wishes, Eisfbnore talk 12:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for routes[edit]

Hi. After completing the map of the 1939 tramway, it strikes me that it should be possible to describe tram and metro lines down the line of "from X to Y it follows Fooveien" etc. You come over any references which would actually make such comments possible? I know the guys at US Highways have some government documents they cite and things like that. At home I have a 1991 copy of a map published by Oslo Sporveier showing all the metro, tram and bus routes in town (like a full-size, fold-out map which is a street map of Oslo, but with all the lines following the various lines). Do you know if they publish these sorts of things any more? Arsenikk (talk) 00:02, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just borrowed Fristad's 1987 book on the Oslo Tramway (Storbysjel på skinner), and there is a route map from the same year in it, with several tram halts that now are closed, but with no street names. However, the book contains much prose describing where, in what streets the lines went. I also came a cross a map with all the metro, tram and bus routes as you describe above for some time ago, in some kind of a tourist brochure by Visit Oslo (next to this route map). {{google maps}} could also be used for the current state, I believe. The 2000 map frequently used by Geschichte may be helpful as well. Eisfbnore talk 08:16, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The 2000 one is a stylized map, i.e. it doesn't show where the lines actually run. But it is in a book of road maps, which are probably still published. Geschichte (talk) 10:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editing tip[edit]

Your bio articles often lack important features such as stub tags and the DEFAULTSORT, most or some categories etc. A tip for you is therefore to copy the text from an existing stub and change the text as needed. That way you will have the framework.

You assess your own articles which in itself is fine. However you often give the article too high ratings. For instance Jehans Nordby is nowhere near start-class; it contains exactly two sentences about his life.

Also I saw over at Arent Solem that direct translations of NBL was cited with an SNL tag. Why? Also you don't need citation tags after every sentence - one tag covers the preceding material, whether it be one sentence, two sentences or an entire paragraph (not two paragraphs though). Geschichte (talk) 10:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the tip. I know I often forget to leave stub tags, cats, persondata and that kind of stuff in the end of the article at the time of creation, but I use to add them later (normally). For example, if I do not know whether a category exists or not, I do find it more convinient to use HotCat instead of the wikilink tool in the upper left corner of the edit window. I also suspect that persondata and DS will be added by some random bot. Eisfbnore talk 11:47, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lasse Midttun[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Lasse Midttun 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 a person or group of people, 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.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Catfish Jim & the soapdish 20:50, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A problem[edit]

Why have you removed page numbers on Erling Welle-Strand? Which policy says that page numbers should not be seen by the reader? Geschichte (talk) 16:53, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've not removed them, but applied the {{Rp}}-template instead. That is for avoiding repetition in the reference section. A sort of middle-way between op.cit. and harvard citations. --Eisfbnore talk 21:04, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well I can't see the page numbers now, so those behind RP should rethink a thing or two... Or are you saying that someone (not me) actually don't want our readers to see the page numbers? Bad Geschichte (talk) 19:34, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I really think you should consider expanding the article's lead instead of wrongly accusing me of removing page numbers in citations. The relevant page number is now located behind each footnote. --Eisfbnore talk 21:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see it now. Must be difficult for new users to see, but mabye people will get used to it in 3-4 years. I'd rather contribute with original content than spend time expanding the summary of every article I've ever started (+15,000?) Geschichte (talk) 12:26, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This type of referencing should not be used in this context. It was explicitly designed for use when a single source was used very many times in the same article (we're talking of dozens, if not over a hundred). The main reason is that, since most readers are not interested in references, there should be as few distractions as possible in the prose, and instead use the bottom of the article for details. The longer the inline citations, the more difficult it is to read. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it is a good idea. To quote the template documentation: "It is a solution for the problem of an article with a source that must be cited many, many times, at numerous different pages." Arsenikk (talk) 12:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Halvdan Koht springs to mind... Geschichte (talk) 14:17, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Arvid Weber Skjærpe[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Arvid Weber Skjærpe 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 a person or group of people, 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.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Jimmy Pitt talk 14:49, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I de-speedied this since he is notable as, if not for anything else, then at least as acting director of KS. So thanks Eisfbnore, I didn't even know that there was a KS director between Ulleren and Vågeng! Geschichte (talk) 14:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Me neither. I just stumbled upon him when writing about his newspaper Vestkysten. Do you have some non-atekst refs (Norsk presses historie 1660–2010 for example) that could expand the two articles even further? I am considering pushing both him and his newspaper towards GA. --Eisfbnore talk 15:26, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
NPH 60-10 generally has a 25-year notability threshold for newspapers, so it's not there. Geschichte (talk) 10:24, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lokaltrafikk[edit]

If you for some reason want me to reference something from my almost complete collection of Lokaltrafikk, the next two weeks would be a good time. I don't know if I have much time to dig around for stuff, but if you have a particular article or something you want me to look at, I'll have access to it for the holidays. Arsenikk (talk) 01:04, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I think Rodeløkka Depot needs some more sources. I'm also considering starting an article on the 1970s "Kålormen" trams from Düsseldorf, so I'd be glad if you would add some stuff from your LT collection to the future article (given that there is something written on the trams there). --Eisfbnore talk 12:49, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiCup/2011 signups[edit]

Seeing as, so far as I can see, there is no flag for Oslo, I will give you the Norwegian flag. I can change it later if you like- just contact me on my talk page. J Milburn (talk) 13:58, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, we only use flags, as opposed to coats of arms. As for how many points will be needed- it's hard to tell. Last year, it was almost any points would get you through round one; this year, less sure. I would imagine 10 would probably be ok, and 20 would be a sure thing, but I couldn't honestly say.

Welcome to the 2011 WikiCup![edit]

Hello, happy new year and welcome to the 2011 WikiCup! Your submissions' page can be found here and instructions of how to update the page can be found here and on the submissions' page itself. From the submissions' page, a bot will update the main scoresheet. Our rules have been very slightly updated from last year; the full rules can be found here. Please remember that you can only receive points for content on which you have done significant work in 2011; nominations of work from last year and "drive-by" nominations will not be awarded points. Signups are going to remain open through January, so if you know of anyone who would like to take part, please direct them to Wikipedia:WikiCup/2011 signups. The judges can be contacted on the WikiCup talk page, on their respective talk pages, or by email. Other than that, we will be in contact at the end of every month with the newsletter. If you want to stop or start receiving newsletters, please remove your name from or add your name to this list. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 14:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tryvandshøiden (station)[edit]

Hi. Recommend you ask User:Arsenikk to help you out with a bit of expansion♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Borgund Stave Church[edit]

One night only!! Borgund Stave Church offers the latest in innovative referencing technique, introducing the 21st century at a computer near you! Unique among over three million articles, if featured hard-coded <sup> for manual instatement of reference numbers and extensive use of ibid for proper referral. Available now for a limited time only, until some wise-guy reverts to standard conformity in a devastating act of art destruction, which later generations will know solely as vandalism. You'll never see this on an online encyclopedia again! Arsenikk (talk) 00:58, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haha!! That was pretty awzm. Why do something easy if you can do it complicated? --Eisfbnore talk 20:03, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:01, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Tryvandshøiden (station)[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tryvandshøiden (station) GA status[edit]

Hello Eisfbnore. First of all I would like to congratulate you on today's DYK. I found the article interesting and well presented but thought it would benefit from a bit of copyediting. After I had completed the edit, I thought I would check the talk page for WikiProjects, etc. I must say I was most surprised to see that these were all rated GA which is pretty unusual for such a recent article where only one editor has been involved. I then saw from the article's history that the rating had been carried out by GA bot which I thought was designed to assist human assessment rather than doing the job fully automatically. But perhaps you can provide more background on all this and explain how GA bot came into the picture? - Ipigott (talk) 13:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the meantime, I have seen that there was indeed a proper GA review of this article by Arsenikk at Talk:Tryvandshøiden (station)/GA1 - so that's all I need to know. Well done! - Ipigott (talk) 15:34, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for cleaning up my Norwegianisms. I'm glad you found the article interesting. --Eisfbnore talk 15:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 January 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 18:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Less known names[edit]

Which guideline says that disambiguation should be done by inserting lesser known middle names, than using their well-known occupation/profession? Just curious. Geschichte (talk) 10:22, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I guess your right here. And for instance: Harvard citations ought never to be used inline in a "References" section, unless the cited book is sorted alphabetically in a "Bibliography" list. Bw, --Eisfbnore talk 17:39, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

Thanks for letting me know about Template:Sfn, that's going to really help me cite books in the future.
--Gyrobo (talk) 21:31, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I prefer using {{sfn}} rather than {{harvnb}}, since I don't need to worry about orphaning refs or creating silly ref name-tags to avoid duplication when using it. Bw --Eisfbnore talk 21:36, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 January 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:46, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2011 January newsletter[edit]

We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions), who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions), with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to Greece Yellow Evan (submissions), who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1, Principality of Sealand Miyagawa (submissions), who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and United Kingdom Jarry1250 (submissions) who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 22:31, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled user[edit]

Hi. I just granted you Autopatrolled user rights :) Arsenikk (talk) 21:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Eisfbnore talk 21:38, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 February 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:13, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled[edit]

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

  • This permission does not give you any special status or authority
  • Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
  • You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
  • If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Ironholds (talk) 16:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Left the note, went to add the permission and facepalmed. My bad. Ironholds (talk) 16:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hahaha, thanks anyway! Bw, Eisfbnore talk 21:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination for Olav Braarud[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Olav Braarud at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Rcej (Robert) - talk 06:01, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 February 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:15, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Olav Braarud[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 18:06, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil[edit]

If you don't like something in Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil, feel free to open a discussion in its talk page. Me and Astynax have both a lot of work bringing the article to its current status. It uses the same standard seen in other articles about Brazilian royals that are now Featured articles. But, please, do not force your personal preference. Again, use talk page. --Lecen (talk) 15:54, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if you found my edit offensive, but images ought not to have a forced size on its images, per MOS:IMAGES. Best wishes, Eisfbnore talk 16:10, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ekebergbanen (company)[edit]

Hi Eisfbnore, I was lead to believe that there was to be a rewrite of Ekebergbanen (company) last weekend with new material (see User talk:Pyrotec#Ekebergbanen (company)), which is why nothing has happened on the GAN review. Are you intending to do any changes to the article? Pyrotec (talk) 14:59, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm sorry, it had slipped my mind. I had a math exam at the top of my mind last week, but I now I have winter holidays, so I hope I'll get round to rewrite the article sometime soon. Bw --Eisfbnore talk 13:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 February 2011[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 17:36, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2011 February newsletter[edit]

So begins round two of the WikiCup! We now have eight pools, each with eight random contestants. This round will continue until the end of April, when the top two of each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers of those remaining, will make it to round three. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions) (first, with 487 points) and Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions) (second, with 459), who stormed the first round. Scotland Casliber (submissions) finished third with 223. Twelve others finished with over 100 points- well done to all of you! The final standings in round one can be seen here. A mere 8 points were required to reach round two; competition will no doubt be much more fierce this round, so be ready for a challenge! A special thanks goes, again, to United Kingdom Jarry1250 (submissions) for dealing with all bot work. This year's bot, as well as running smoothly, is doing some very helpful things that last year's did not. Also, thanks to Bavaria Stone (submissions) for some helpful behind-the-scenes updating and number crunching.

Some news for those who are interested- March will see a GAN backlog elimination drive, which you are still free to join. Organised by WikiProject Good articles, the drive aims to minimise the GAN backlog and offers prizes to those who help out. Of course, you may well be able to claim WikiCup points for the articles you review as part of the drive. Also ongoing is the Great Backlog Drive, looking to work on clearing all of the backlogs on Wikipedia; again, incentives are offered, and the spirit of friendly competition is alive, while helping the encyclopedia is the ultimate aim. Though unrelated to the WikiCup, these may well be of interest to some of you.

Just a reminder of the rules; if you have done significant work on content this year and it is promoted in this round, you may claim for it. Also, anything that was promoted after the end of round one but before the beginning of round two may be claimed for in round two. Details of the rules can be found on this page. For those interested in statistics, a running total of claims can be seen here, and a very interesting table of that information (along with the highest scorers in each category) can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:40, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 7 March 2011[edit]

DYK nomination of Henrik Christian Fredrik Størmer[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Henrik Christian Fredrik Størmer at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jujutacular talk 21:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Egil Werner Erichsen[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Egil Werner Erichsen at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Schwede66 09:52, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Edvard Heiberg[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Edvard Heiberg at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Schwede66 09:52, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see new note on DYK talk page. Yoninah (talk) 20:36, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Ragnar Fjørtoft[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Ragnar Fjørtoft at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 10:42, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 March 2011[edit]

DYK nomination for F. S. Platou[edit]

Hello! Your submission of F. S. Platou at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! -- Rcej (Robert) - talk 09:14, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ragnar Fjørtoft[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Egil Werner Erichsen[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 16:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Edvard Heiberg[edit]

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Henrik Christian Fredrik Størmer[edit]

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:03, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Liberalisme (anthology)[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 March 2011[edit]

DYK for F. S. Platou[edit]

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:04, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Anton Wilhelm Brøgger (printer)[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Anton Wilhelm Brøgger (printer) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --Doug Coldwell talk 18:32, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you expand the article a little, to get the minimum amount of characters needed for a DYK?--Doug Coldwell talk 14:08, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How much more is needed? --Eisfbnore talk 17:09, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ragnar Stoud Platou[edit]

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Bernt Heiberg[edit]

Thanks for the article Victuallers (talk) 08:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps something for you?[edit]

See Wikipedia:Credo accounts‎ Arsenikk (talk) 01:12, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the tip, I've signed up for an account. --Eisfbnore talk 12:10, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And while I've got you here: Would be so kind to review Vestgrensa or Norsk Spisevognselskap for me? My standing in the WikiCup Pool A isn't too good... Thanks, Eisfbnore talk 12:13, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Vestgrensa (station)[edit]

The article Vestgrensa (station) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Vestgrensa (station) for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:50, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 March 2011[edit]

WikiCup 2011 March newsletter[edit]

We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions) with 231 points, who leads Pool H. Poland Piotrus (submissions) (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring.

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round three is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:55, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK userboxes[edit]

Hello, I've recently created User:Eisfbnore/DYK, where I've listed my DYKs. Unfortunately, the userboxes appear rather messy on the page. Could someone with greater skills with userboxes than me please do something that would make the userboxes to stack more tidy? Thanks, --Eisfbnore talk 15:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed up the page so that they stack now. You can change the "align" parameter to left-justify the column if you want. Reaper Eternal (talk | contribs | block) 16:12, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! --Eisfbnore talk 16:18, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rædwald of East Anglia[edit]

Thanks Eisfbnore for all your efforts in helping me to get the article get to GA. Your suggestions and encouragement was much appreciated! --Amitchell125 (talk) 15:51, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure! I learned very much on the history of East Anglia (a topic I'm not too familiar with :p) when reading through it. It's a very well-written article, and I think it's definetily worthy of an FA. Since English is not my mother tongue, I'd recommend you to ask some other editors with a better grasp of English than me to do some copyediting and wordsmithing to make the prose brilliant. Best wishes! --Eisfbnore talk 17:30, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ralph Høibakk[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 April 2011[edit]

DYK for Anton Wilhelm Brøgger (printer)[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Karl Marx GA[edit]

I am not sure myself, but I think there are editors disputing the GA status, so best if the submission is struck out for now - I'll restore it when it seems stable. Could you do strike it out on my page? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:32, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the reply. I am not quite sure what you want me to do; should I strike out my message on your user talk, or the Marx entry on your submissions page? --Eisfbnore talk 19:35, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I did it myself. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:42, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

3RR[edit]

I know that. But the article is at the middle of a FAC nomination and the editor made several edits ([1], [2] and [3]) where he gave no summary or reasons for any of them. Worse: no citation or anything to back the edits. Just take a look at the history log. --Lecen (talk) 11:42, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look. And you performed three, not four reverts. :) --Eisfbnore talk 11:48, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 11:51, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article for deletion debate[edit]

The article Young Conservatives of Texas has been nominated for deletion at AfD. Your input as to whether or not this article meets notability standards is invited. Thank you. Carrite (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Randi Solem[edit]

I've recently added an infobox to the above article, and added birth and death dates to it with the templates birth year and death date and age. However, an unexpected parser error occured when I saved the article. Can somebody please fix this? Thanks, --Eisfbnore talk 21:37, 9 April 2011 (UTC) (P. S: Her birth date is unknown)[reply]

I've taken the templates out and simply added the data. Hope that's OK. Peridon (talk) 22:19, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And Chzz tidied up... Peridon (talk) 22:22, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you could have used them - "Do NOT use this template when the person’s exact date of birth is disputed or unknown." is what it says. Easier to just type it in. The one that keeps count of the age is handy for BLPs, but when they're dead, the figures are only going to change when new info comes up (or they turn out to be a vampire...) Peridon (talk) 22:27, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Municipalities of Lithuania/archive1[edit]

Hi, you have participated in this FLRC. Some work has been done since. Please review your comments and indicate whether you support keeping or delisting. It would be good to finally close this thing. Thank you. Renata (talk) 14:20, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm satisfied! --Eisfbnore talk 14:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Your GA nomination of Norsk Spisevognselskap[edit]

The article Norsk Spisevognselskap you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Norsk Spisevognselskap for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:00, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, just a nudge as I hadn't seen any response yet. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:07, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 April 2011[edit]

Capitalising cite book[edit]

Please don't make edits like this - {{cite book}} and {{Cite book}} are exactly the same, and since there is no redirect involved, it's even more pointless than "fixing" links to redirects that are not broken. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care whether {cite book} is applicated with a lowercase or uppercase "c", I just wanted to standardise upon one of them to make the edit screen more tidy. Additionally, I think it's even more pointless to start a discussion over such a minor issue – our time would be much better spent writing up articles on obscure branch lines. :) --Eisfbnore talk 07:12, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 April 2011[edit]

Reviewer granted[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:08, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks very much for your confidence, but my raison d'être on Wikipedia is to contribute with content, not reviewing, reverting or otherwise meddling with other people's edits. So please remove this user right for me, as I feel it gives me a duty I do not want to have. Happy easter, Eisfbnore talk 21:13, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Of course. Happy Easter to you too. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:16, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Municipalities of Lithuania FLRC[edit]

Please revisit this FLRC to provide an update following all the hard work of many contributors trying to save the featured status of the list. Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Renata3 asked me to revisit the FLRC in this section. As noted with this comment, the referencing issue has been solved, so I have no objections to let this list keep the FL star. However, another editor posted this comment, so I'm not sure if everybody else agree. Eisfbnore talk 19:24, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would appreciate your own comment at the FLRC itself. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:26, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review of Æthelwold of East Anglia[edit]

All suggestions acted on. Will double check article again for any silly slip-ups. Thanks for your help! --Amitchell125 (talk) 17:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've passed the article now. Very well done! My reviews are getting shorter and shorter for each time, since your articles are getting better and better – even before I start reviewing! --Eisfbnore talk 17:06, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again Eisfbnore, glad you're around to help me along. --Amitchell125 (talk) 18:02, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2011[edit]

Vidkun Quisling[edit]

I hope you don't mind, but I restored the full name in the 'early life' - note the sound file there is not the same one as the lede, and shows pronunciation of his full name;

...hence, it really needs his full name there. Whereas, in the lede - and with IPA - it would cause too much 'clutter'; this detail, within the body, does seem entirely appropriate. In addition, there should not actually be info in the lede which is not elaborated upon within the body text, as the lede is a summary of the whole. For that reason, a lede does not normally require citations (except for direct quotations and any extraordinary claims). In GA/FA review, it is normal to ensure all info in a lede is elaborated upon within the body text. I hope this is OK with you. All of the other edits you've made to the article have been constructive and helpful; thanks for that. Best,  Chzz  ►  13:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. --Eisfbnore talk 13:53, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And for instance: I noticed that the two ogg files are spoken in with a West Norwegian dialect. Do you want me to upload one or two sound files with a standard Oslo dialect? --Eisfbnore talk 14:17, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Quisling[edit]

Yeah, Dahl has a little on it. I was reluctant to add in a great deal, to keep the biography tightly focussed, but a few sentences couldn't hurt. The problem is, where? I don't think a whole new section (of this article) is deserved. Any suggestions? Also, thanks for your help with it all. - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 09:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regards File:Dupuis-Nansen-Carle-Savio-Quisling.jpg - I think you got the link wrong for link text "Galleri Nor". Also, (showing my ignorance of Norwegian copyright law) surely that was commissioned as a work of art? I like both images though, I will adjust the brightness on them, I think, at some point. - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 09:36, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You propably know more of Norwegian copyright law than me (no irony), but I'll perhaps ask User:Kjetil_r for advice, who happens to be an expert on the issue. I also uploaded a few other images to the Commons, just check commons:Category:Villa Grande (perhaps add the library image to the Universism section?). --Eisfbnore talk 09:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good idea. The argument over Italy's similar law stretched to many, many pages on Commons as I recall :P Pretty sure the ones of buildings won't count as artistic, it's just the ones of people I worry about. Yup, Quisling's library looks a nice addition, I'll add it. - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 10:24, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2011 April newsletter[edit]

Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Scotland Casliber (submissions), who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.

This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions) and Assyrian people Nergaal (submissions) who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to Democratic Republic of the Congo Candlewicke (submissions) (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!

Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 19:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 May 2011[edit]

Jørgen Rytterager review[edit]

Hi Eisfbnore,

Just wanted to give you a heads-up that I looked at your article at DYK, and while it's fine for the normal DYK criteria, with only one secondary source on a not obviously notable figure, I'm not sure it meets the WP:GNG. Your thoughts? Thanks! -- Khazar (talk) 02:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Answered there. Cheers -- Khazar (talk) 15:10, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photos/National Library of Norway[edit]

Hi Eisfbnore. Quite to the point, that message. Could you please document that? Meaning, "that photographies of people are commisioned as works of arts", and that this is always the case, including the photos made available by the National Library? The National Library doesn't usually just make photos accessible unless they're okay to use. Manxruler (talk) 15:17, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See this section above. I know very little about image copyright law in general, but I think it's better to be safe than sorry. --Eisfbnore talk 15:21, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You read Norwegian, I presume. I do know quite a lot about Norwegian copyright. Here',s what the Norwegian Archive, Library and Museum Authority says about the issue of photographic work/photographic work of art:
  • "Fotografisk verk – forutsetter verkshøyde, dvs. at fotografiet har en viss originalitet, at det er blitt til ved en individuell, skapende innsats.
  • Fotografisk bilde – avgjøres etter rent tekniske kriterier.
  • Beror på et skjønn, må vurderes konkret i hvert enkelt tilfelle.
  • Det kreves noe kvalitativt mer en bare gjengivelse for å kunne betegnes som åndsverk. Avgjørende er om fotografen fikk satt sitt spesielle preg på bildet da det ble tatt.
So, nowhere does it say that portrait photos "photographies of people" are automatically work of art. The issue of a photo as a work of art is decided individually and requires that the photographer put his own particular mark of style on the work. Now, does this mean that a straight-forward portrait photo is a work of art? I wouldn't think so. Manxruler (talk) 15:38, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Further, please don't remove urls to NB Digital. Limited accessibility is not an argument to remove an URL, it still eases verifiability of the information. After all, we do use sites like Miramar ship index or newspapers archives, as sources, sites that you have to pay to view. Manxruler (talk) 15:59, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine with me! --Eisfbnore talk 16:24, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

Thanks for the welcome message on my no-Wiki user talk page. I'm having a bit of trouble with the no:FLK «Maudie» article. I can't get the correct German flag to display, and the flag template at no-Wiki needs the correct flag adding. I did post about this at WT:Norway. Can you help fix this? Mjroots (talk) 18:00, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really untalented on this, so I recommend you ask either User:Jon Harald Søby or no-wiki users at no:Wikipedia:Torget. --Eisfbnore talk 18:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Have asked at no-Wiki page as you suggested. Will see what comes of this. Mjroots (talk) 18:13, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Style parameter[edit]

What is your problem with the style parameter in Template:Infobox station? If you don't like a style, for whatever reason, you can change it. You don't seem to have done much creatively to a number of Danish station articles, except to destroy that entry. What is the problem? Secondarywaltz (talk) 19:26, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was, that it looked ugly with the tacky red color and the strange font. I'd prefer to follow the Copenhagen Metro's own minimalistic style. I would also appreciate if you would keep a more civil tone on my talk page. Thank you. --Eisfbnore talk 19:31, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I fully support Eisfbnore on this issue; I was going to remove the style myself, but never got around to it. There is no reason at all to include color or style in an infobox, particularly one that breaches both out manual of style, and one with no resemblance to the graphical design used by the metro itself. Part of Wikipedia's professional image lays with out standardized design in all articles, whether it is about medicine, metros or football clubs. Creating exceptions to this make the site look messy, and will eventually create discussions as to which styles are "beautiful" and "ugly", and which are suitable or unsuitable. Arsenikk (talk) 19:50, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Relax - I simply asked what the problem was, since it was only styling that you removed and I could not understand what the edit summary meant. Don't read something into what I said that does not exist. Now I know what your point of view is - everything has been clarified. In my opion, I think the default name in the top of the box, without adding any other styling, should use a larger font that would apply universally. Thank you both for your contributions and I hope we can work in cooperaion in the future. Secondarywaltz (talk) 20:10, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a good example of a Copenhagen Metro station sign [4], using that ugly dark red that you don't like. It is their choice of branding. But let's move on to content and not debate style. Secondarywaltz (talk) 20:37, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 May 2011[edit]

talkback[edit]

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Talk:Larry Geraty/GA1's talk page. bW 02:22, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Knut Tvedt[edit]

Thank you Victuallers (talk) 00:02, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Larry Geraty[edit]

Thank you for the excellent review on Larry Geraty. I think the article is much improved as a result of it. If you have a chance, feel free to also review Heather Knight (educator), but I completely understand if you would rather not. I make a point to stay away from reviewing good articles myself (as I never catch the minor nuances that should be caught..). Happy editing! bW 18:12, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

Thanks for that bit of help with Truth!

Anything else you can do would be much appreciated :o) Pesky (talk …stalk!) 08:48, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2011[edit]

DYK for Snarum Station[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 09:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jørgen Rytterager[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 09:34, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Your 3RR complaint[edit]

Hello Eisfbnore. I looked into Wikipedia:AN3#User:Corner benchmark reported by User:Eisfbnore (Result: ). This is not in good enough form for an admin to close directly. It seems to me that the best option for admin action is to reopen the sock case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sju hav/Archive. I assume that's who you think Corner benchmark is. Let me know if you would consider helping with such a case. If it were opened, I'm willing to supply an admin comment and would also consider closing it if there is enough evidence. If someone can show that Corner benchmark is continuing a crusade that was begun on the Norwegian Wikipedia, that would be persuasive. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 May 2011[edit]

Collaboration[edit]

  • Ever feel like you're editing in a vacuum, and long for some camaraderie?
  • Do you want to improve an article and put a Featured Article star on your userpage but don't know how to get started?
  • Want to be part of a cohesive, committed team working together to improve conservatism one article at a time?

If you're interested in having lots of fun and working with great editors, click here and make history. We're now taking nominations. Lionelt (talk) 01:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On another note, I just noticed you requested that delisted articles not display on the project's Recognized content page. [5] Wondering what is the reason? Lionel (talk) 04:20, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I do think that delisted articles aren't that "recognized" any longer. --Eisfbnore talk 06:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll edit the template.Lionel (talk) 07:29, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Norwegian Botanical Association[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Norwegian Botanical Association 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 an organization or company, 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.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. TransporterMan (TALK) 16:29, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the nomination, seeing that you are a regular here; please add reliable sources which show that the organization is notable. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eisfbnore/Archive_1&oldid=1136190674"