User talk:Slarre

Welcome!

Hello, Slarre, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few 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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  android79 01:54, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. Please take a closer look at the speedy criteria for images. If two files are identical but have different filetypes (i.e. JPG and PNG) then the undesired type is explicitly not a CSD and must be deleted through the WP:IFD process instead. Cheers, android79 01:54, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

LoL. Wikipedia bureaucracy owns! /Slarre 01:58, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Funny you should say that. IIRC, I'm the one who suggested the "different file types = not speedy" rule, and now it's biting me in the ass. I untagged about 30 of them earlier today. android79 02:00, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You should update [Bias], there's a new survey called "Journalist 2006" that gives quite a different result compared to "Journalist 2000". See: http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=572&a=539612&previousRenderType=2

~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.224.188.235 (talk) 23:59, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What about all the Iraqis are pissed off at the US because of the war? It was certainly not a "liberation". --Hottentot

Pissed because the US removed the bloodthirsty massmurdering dictator Saddam Hussein? Please... /Slarre 02:33, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, because it's obvious that the US's motive for invading Iraq was oil, and that the US lied about their reasons for invading Iraq. Furthermore, conditions for the Iraqi people have definitely not improved since Saddam was deposed. Most of them have no electricity and running water. --Hottentot

OMG, moonbat detected! /Slarre 02:42, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How about Ignorance detected? --Hottentot

Please do not restore your cat on Galloway, Chirac, etc. It is pretty clear that the cat is going to be deleted. AlistairMcMillan 15:22, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Then discuss this at the correct please instead of engaging in edit wars. /Slarre 15:28, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware of the three revert rule. AlistairMcMillan 15:44, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have not reverted more than three times, just as many times as you did. /Slarre 15:45, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't accusing you of breaking the rule. I was just making sure you were aware of it, so that you don't break it. AlistairMcMillan 15:47, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help translate this for me to swedish? Many thanks in advance!

The first railroad line in Albania was built in 1948 linking Tiranë with Durrës on the coast and Elbasan in the interior. The main ports are Durrës, Vlorë, Shëngjin, and Sarandë.

Albania has a somewhat limited telephone network. There is a fairly extensive broadcasting service, however, and television programming began in 1971. Newspaper circulation is quite limited. There is a state university at Tiranë.

--Armour 09:59, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! What do you type in pstoedit (at the command line) in order to convert from eps to svg? /Slarre 18:59, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. pstoedit uses plugins to convert to different target formats. Run pstoedit -help to see if there are any SVG plugins available on your install. On my Debian Linux system, I have the "plot-svg" plugin which converts to SVG output via GNU's libplot. This is available by installing the libpstoedit0 Debian package. You can then run pstoedit -f plot-svg inputfile.eps outputfile.svg .

Note that this implementation isn't perfect, the SVG output generated required some hand-tuning in the attempts I have made. If you have any problems, let me know and I would be glad to help out. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 19:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have noticed that you have recently been creating a number of articles were the content is of the form: X is a Y author. Please consider adding a little more information to each of these articles because as they stand each is a valid candidate for speedy deletion under criteria A7 (An article about a real person, group of people, band, or club that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject). Adding one or two sentences to each article indicating why these authors are notable (published books, literary awards, ...) is all that is required to overcome this problem. --Allen3 ^talk 02:36, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hej! I've been translating the Boström article that you requested a while ago and ran into this sentence: Hans övriga intressen bestod i ett stärkt försvar vilket yttrade sig i från hans sida på ett stärkt sjöförsvar och ett starkt motstånd mot upphävande av indelningsverket. Is stärkt right or should that be starkt? While I've never run across stärkt försvar, it's not unlikely that it just comes from not reading too much Swedish anymore. I've though about translating the sentence like this: In addition, he was interested in a strong defence, which he considered to have manifested itself as a strong marine defence, and a strong opposition to the abolition of the Swedish allotment system. How does that sound? -Yupik 20:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Nice to see someone translating this article. The word "stärkt" in Swedish means "strengthened", although I think "strong" would work here as well. /Slarre 21:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've been reading too much German lately, as I figured it should be förstärkt or starkt, but not stärkt. Pretty interesting article and a challenge to translate as I have to constantly be looking up the terms for things like "allotment system"! Hopefully I'll be able to work on the ones left over over time, too. Plus, I've been translating other related articles (Ludvig Almqvist). Feel free to check out the translations and copyedit them! -Yupik 22:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! I'll check them out. /Slarre 22:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I think you have misunderstood Wikipedia:Fair_use#Policy item #9.

It says: "Fair use images should be used only in the article namespace". The article namespace means all those articles that do not start with "User:", "Talk:", "Template", etc. I don't see why you have to remove fair use images from articles such as Riksdag. Could you please explain your reasoning?

Fred-Chess 23:02, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use logos can only be used to describe the article in question. See User:Durin/Removal of fair use images for more info. It is also a standard policy in enwiki to use colors instead of logos in lists related to political parties/election results. /Slarre 23:23, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've translated sv:Arvid Lindman to Arvid Lindman now. Just so you know. Will most likely translate a few more of the pages that translation are requested for, don't remember if you had requested any of those, or if it was only this, but anyway. --Spreetin 21:33, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Looks very good. /Slarre 22:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you please stop unilaterally changing the maps in all those articles some of us actually like them and should be given the opportunity to defend our views on the matter. Self-appointed arbiters only cause edit wars.--Tekleni 20:37, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto!--Eupator 20:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Self-appointed arbiters" Aha! I guess that's why it's ok for you to revert to your version. /Slarre 20:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They jumped all over me for not liking their taste in maps too, you are not alone. The Country the article is about should be proudly in the center of the map, the old maps should stay!--Hamparzoum 20:51, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Both images that you placed in that article have the same problem. There are no rationales provided relating to fair use for either image. They are copyrighted images and neither in the public domain nor actually within fair use (as per your apparent claims on those images' pages). The more recently-taken (Nobel Prize) photo is better quality and more recent, but it is not within fair use, and there is no fair use rationale given for it (by you and/or the original uploader), just as there is no rationale given for fair use for any of the relatively-current photos of Pinter that you or others have taken from the BBC.

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Harold Pinter.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NYScholar 08:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't even start.. There are tons of archives on the top right corner, if you want more background info on the concensus reached, please check them.. And check the templates on top of the talk page as well. On the other hand, if you find any impartial information or source proving his participation in anything, please bring them in. Maybe he did not participate in them and that's why it is not mentioned, has that thought occurred to you my fellow?? We have been going over this for months now with many passers-by dropping in and asking the same questions and over and over and over again.. Funny thing is, nobody can bring in any sources. It is like Groundhog Day, it seems to start all over again :)) Baristarim 16:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I second this thought. Please read over the most recent archives of the Ataturk Talk page. If indeed you have any information regarding credible assertions that Ataturk played a part in either the Armenian or Assyrian genocide please refer to such so that the issue might be further evaluated. I'm pretty familiar with most of the activities surounding the Armenian Genocide (though perhaps less so in the Assyrian case) and I am also very familiar with Ataturk's activities during this period as well as preceeding such and after and I am not aware of anything that directly links Ataturk to the Armenian genocide. If one examines his activities during this period you sill see that he performed almost exclusively as a professional military officer and was not involved in any way in establishing state policy or carrying it out - beyond his duties as on officer in the Ottoman/Turkish army. While the army did slaughter conscripted Armenian men and did attack certain Armenian towns and villages it was not the principle means of enacted the Armenian Genocide nor arre there any reports that I am aware of of Ataturk taking part in any actions against Armenian civilians or Armenian conscripts during this period. By all accounts Ataturk was appauled by the severity and in-humaness of the CUP directed actions against the Armenians during this time.--THOTH 16:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was attempting some humor, so don't take it the wrong way :) As AW said below, we had a very looon debate about this after the page got protected for edit-warring on this precise issue, and it just got unprotected yesterday, we put in the concensus version that was agreed on the talk page after a looong debate, and it had to be semi-protected again couple of hours ago because of random anon vandalism and edit-warring. So, we r a bit touchy :) But you are more than welcome to drop in and participate in the debate: many users would like that article to succeed in a GA review and an eventual FA review, so we need to cover all grounds with good references.. But just keep in mind that there is a live debate. Don't say I didn't warn you :)Baristarim 16:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. If you have some verifiable sources about him and genocide, please discuss that on the article's talk page. We just had a long and contentious debate about it, so people are still probably a bit riled up - please be as reasonable as you can. Thanks. --AW 16:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An image you uploaded, Image:Swedish Navy.svg, was tagged with the {{coatofarms}} copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as {{seal}}. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 08:17, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Livgardet.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:55, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have translated the Carl Swartz article if you'd like to check it out. Pikiwedian 07:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! It looks very good~indeed. /Slarre 16:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that you changed the logotype back to the old one in the article on Sveriges Television. Please note that the logotype I changed to earlier today is the current and correct one used by SVT since 2006. The logotype you have supplied is the one that was in use from 2001 until last year. The size and style of the lettering has since been modified and nowadays almost always presented white on blue background. However, I can make an inverted version on a transparent background, if that's preferred. --Aatox 23:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry for the misunderstanding. An inverted logo on transparent background would be good. /Slarre 23:27, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll do that tomorrow. Or later today, I mean... --Aatox 23:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) /Slarre 23:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Sveriges Television logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 13:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DFLP logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 17:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Anders Wijkman.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 23:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the WikiProject Countries talk page, you had either explictly declared a general interest in the project, or had participated at a discussion that appears related to Location Maps for European countries.
New maps had been created by David Liuzzo, and are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions), and also which new version should be applied for which countries.
Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. The subsections on the talk page that had shown David Liuzzo's original maps, now show his most recent design.
Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 7 Feb2007 20:36 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Charlotte Cederschiöld.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 03:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Christofer Fjellner.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 03:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Nils Lundgren.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 07:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Lars Wohlin.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 07:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Maria Carlshamre.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 07:16, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New move proposal here: Talk:High_Council_of_Sweden#Requested_move_2 —  AjaxSmack  02:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you wish, please comment further on this topic here. ~  AjaxSmack  07:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, compatriot. We've met here on several occasions, I believe, but what brings me here now is that I notice you more often than what could be considered normal on my watchlist. Were I paranoid, I might think you were stalking me, but sane as I am I simply note that you share some of my interests. Therefore, and also considering your frequent appearance on Special:Recentchangeslinked/User:Jobjörn/Riksdagsledamöter, I was wondering if you would like to help out with my one-man wikiproject over at User:Jobjörn/Riksdagsledamöter? Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 23:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In example, my watchlist just showed 15 edits replacing "Moderate Youth League" with "Swedish Young Conservatives". Nice work. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 02:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for the notice, and nice work with the list. I'll take a look at it when I have some time. /Slarre 18:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Sven_Otto_Littorin.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Iamunknown 00:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Anders_Borg.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Iamunknown 00:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for removing the dud entries under Sweden. Are you in a position to provide positive references for other names to prove that they are Jewish? There are very few editors with enough knowledge of Swedish to do so.--Runcorn 23:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Yeah, I'm keeping the list and Category:Swedish Jews on my watchlist since there seem to be some editors with a will to label certain people as Jewish without providing any sources. The entries definitely needs to be sourced. I'll try and see if i can find any reputable sources for other names on the list. /Slarre 23:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I tried to put the "bilateral" template to Finnish-Swedish relations, however, the map doesn't seem to show up. I did upload the map, it's Image:Finland Sweden Locator.png there. I saw you had done Swedish-American relations so maybe you can figure this out. Maybe I missed something very obvious but I can't think what's wrong. --Pudeo (Talk) 19:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The image seems to work fine for me. /Slarre 04:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So for me now, the file name showed as a red link for the whole day eventhough I had refressed it completely. So some database bugs, no probs then. --Pudeo (Talk) 18:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You succeeded in abbreviating four out of four words in an edit summary, a remarkable achievement indeed! ;) Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 00:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, thanks! :) /Slarre 00:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Slarre. I thought I'd drop a note notifying you of the fact that I've removed all contested statements from the Carl Bildt article and initiated a discussion at Talk:Carl Bildt#POV dispute. Please drop by and have your say. Sincerely, Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 01:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...your babelfish. I agree with you about everything but beliving in God. See it:Utente:Checco. But tell me one thing... a person like you, in Sweden... what Swedih party do you find closer to your (and my) political ideas? --Checco 21:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I would probably say that the Liberal (People's) Party is the closest to my views, even if they have started to get a bit too social liberal lately. The Centre Party (the old agrarian party) is also getting more and more liberal which is interesting, even if they still have some anti-liberal views such as support for the EU Common Agricultural Policy and other things. /Slarre 21:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is Sweden a terrible place for a libertarian like you? Obviously I'm joking... --Checco 22:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sweden is just fine :) /Slarre 22:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See you... next time answer me in my user talk, thak you. Very pleased of having met you. --Checco 22:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I worked a little bit with my userpage, userboxes and categories. If you want you can check to see if it is all right. My idea was that all these userboxes make the user automatically member of the related category. I also used and changed two userboxes taken from your userpage (see User:Checco/Userboxes/USA and User:Checco/Userboxes/Israel). I hope you won't be annoyed about it. Sorry also for my bad English. --Checco 12:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, of course not! I'll add those templates to my page too. /Slarre 23:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weasel / biased. I agree. But which *way* do you think its biased? William M. Connolley 23:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The intro is clearly biased against the film, describing it in a pejorative way with words like "controversial" etc. The intro mentions that it argues against "prominent scientific" (however, there are many other prominent scientists who agree that there is not enough evidence of man-made global warming). The intro also states that the film "has been criticised", however it does not mention by WHOM (weasel words). If so much criticism should be mentioned in the intro, then it should also be mentioned that the film also has been received prais by others. Putting only negative criticism in the intro goes against WP:NPOV. /Slarre 23:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh OK, yes there are plenty who think like that. Personally I think the intro is biased in favour of the film, which should be described as propaganda. I only asked because it was impossible to tell from the tag you added which way you were thinking - did you somehow assume no-one could think it biased in favour? William M. Connolley 07:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh... I'd suggest that make a vectorized version of the official version of the Swedish CoA, instead of revering my edits. I don't agree that the "version" of CoA, which you are promoting is official. Just because it's not against the legal recommendation, it's not official. Camptown 17:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's the official version. The version that you're preposing is over 100 years old and not used anymore. /Slarre 17:31, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yet the only official in the public domain. If you disagree, you should create an EXACT copy of what is used right now, and no home made crap. Camptown 17:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:United Nations Human Rights Council logo.png. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:United Nations Commission on Human Rights logo.png. The copy called Image:United Nations Commission on Human Rights logo.png has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and remember exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 18:47, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:PFLP-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:CUF-logo.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:CUF-logo.svg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Centerpartiet.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 16:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Centerpartiet.svg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 16:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Confederation of Swedish Enterprise.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 17:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Confederation of Swedish Enterprise.svg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 17:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Feministiskt initiativ.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 21:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Feministiskt initiativ.svg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 21:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Slarre, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Sweden Democrats-2006logo.png) was found at the following location: User:Slarre/SDtemp. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 21:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Swedish_Home_Guard.svg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 04:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Confederation of Swedish Enterprise.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 17:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Nationalsocialistisk front.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 23:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Feministiskt initiativ.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Ung Vänster.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 15:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Kristdemokraterna.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Junilistan.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Göteborg 2006 logo.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Labour (Israel).png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:11, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:TT-logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:SAC-logo.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...I've answered your question about Swedish regiments a while ago, see my talk page. – Elisson • T • C • 17:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is silly to make statements about biggest and best city in Scandinavia. If you think it is important to claim Stockholm to be the center of scandinavia, then I can easily find similar claims regarding Copenhagen. I dont find such a stupid competition particularly relevant or important. mvh --Rasmus81 03:12, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? Everything that I added to the intro are properly sourced, undisputable facts. I've never claimed Stockholm to be the "center of scandinavia", just that the city itself brands it that way. /Slarre 11:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the brand is silly, childish and as a citizen of Copenhagen quite honestly also a bit offending. I dont think it fits in an article in Wikipedia. I could also start claiming things in the article about Copenhagen. I will do so if you still think it is really relevant to turn wikipedia into the place for swedish crazy-commercials and emphasize where Stockholm is "biggest" and "best" in Scandinavia.

"Copenhagen forms the densiest most populated area in Scandinavia and is furthermore center of the biggest metropolitan region in Scandinavia, Øresundsregionen, with over 3,5 million inhabitants. It is the highest ranked city in the Anholt City rank index in Scandinaviapol.dk." I think such information is commercial rather than information. mvh --Rasmus81 19:27, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sorry if you feel offended, but I didn't invent this brand. The article clearly says that this is a brand used specifically as a self-label by the City of Stockholm and nothing else. Furthermore, the label is not intended to be very serious and is rather used for commercial purposes, and of course it pisses some people off.

Besides, the Oresund Region is part of both Sweden and Denmark and does not belong to Copenhagen exclusively. /Slarre 21:14, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is a Danish-Swedish region, but I personally also know some people in Malmö who find the stockholmian commercial equally stupid. I still think it is a silly and childish stunt, and it doesnt qualify for wikipedia in my view. But you are right, no reason to feel offended. My Swedish friend from Malmö told me about this certain stockholmian narcissistic disease, and advised me to just ignore it :-) Anyhow, I will visit Stockholm in the summer, and despite our little dispute, I am really looking forward to it. Med vänlige hälsningar --Rasmus81 23:28, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're probobly right that it's a bit childish and silly, but as I said it shouldn't be taken that seriously but rather as a humuorous way (with a "twinkle in the eye" as we say) to advertise the city, plus it's always fun to tease some Nordic friends! :-) No offence though, hope you have a nice time in Stockholm! /Slarre 00:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, well, sometimes some of us deserve to be teased :-) --Rasmus81 01:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Stockholm University seal.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Boston Cucumber, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Breno ^talk 15:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anglo-American isn't a nationality but it is an accurate description of Hitchens as he holds dual nationality. Cf. Salman Rushdie who is described as British-Indian, and I'm sure there are many other examples. Musungu jim 20:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

British-American is a more precise description in this case, since Hitchens is of British nationality and not "Anglo". Anglo is an older term that is used more loosly, and usually refers to cultural or ethnic background rather than nationality. /Slarre 09:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anglo is an excepted alternative for English. What is a cultural and ethnic background if it isn't a national one? If it counts for anything Hitchens has stated that he prefers being called English to British.Musungu jim 21:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter what Hitchens himself prefer to be called, Wikipedia is an independent encyclopedia and should use as formal and correct terms as possible. Again, Hitchens nationality isn't English/Anglo (there's no such thing as English citizenship) but British and American, therefor British-American is the adequate term here. Please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)#Opening paragraph. /Slarre 21:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point. Your not disputing Hitchens being described as Anglo-American, simply his nationality being described as such.Musungu jim 12:31, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the discussion page at the Shakespeare article and comment. Tom Reedy 12:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: I have discovered that Fairfax University and University of Fairfax are two different institutions (the first one is a fraud and the second one is possibly legitimate), so I am separating the two articles. --orlady 17:10, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted the gallery here of the two other images by this artist. Any reasons? Also please use edit summaries explaining your edits especially when you remove material like this. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 03:42, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think it's necessary to just use one image in the article, more images is a bit too much and makes the article look a bit plotty. Also, as far as I can see none of the images are compatible with GFDL, so we should try to keep those images at absolute minimum. /Slarre 03:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I deleted Institutional art, because it was too short and had almost no content.

If you can write article with significant content about this topic, you are welcome to create it again. --Amir E. Aharoni 16:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Coat of arms of Ladonia.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, Slarre, but you are wrong. The Counts of Wisborg are not Swedish counts, they are Luxembourgish counts, being in the Luxembourgish nobility at all. Also, all of your initial moves were not discussed and have no backing in any of the Wikipedia conventions. The titles in the names are at the very least prescribed by WP:NC(NT), which goes into detail as to how noble titles are used in article names on Wikipedia. As for the other article, I cannot speak for them other than to say that it is possible they are anomalies or are far better known by those names. The common thing between these counts is that the removal of their royal titles is notable and their new titles are important to the content of the articles and to the article names. Charles 22:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slarre, you are wrong, please come to terms with it. You were wrong about Wikipedia practice, you are wrong when implying that the counts are counts in the Swedish nobility (a duke of British creation living in Canada for instance isn't part of the "Canadian nobility"), there are no applicable Swedish naming conventions on English Wikipedia and you are a hypocrite for moving those pages without discussion AGAINST naming conventions and then accusing me of it when WP:NC(NT) sets guidelines for the use of noble titles in article titles. A history of "controversial moves" is a common, lame and unoriginal argument in an attempt to discredit me but it only discredits you. If you wanted to be educated on the contents of archive 9, Cracow was about a bunch of editors tying to polonize titles, including an administrator who was subject to arbitration and Charles I of Austria vs Charles IV of Hungary was against Hungarian editor with pro-Hungarian vs English usage views. Get it? Because I'm not going to say it again. You are not welcome to post on my page if you are going to try to use previous baseless arguments to discredit me. Charles 21:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tjena, han har förstorat det här i onödan, om du vill delta i diskussionen så skulle det vara uppskattat: WP:AN/I#Disruptive edits, removal of sourced material, POV-pushing, personal attack. — EliasAlucard (talk · contribs) 19:36 07 Nov, 2007 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Freedom House. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors.

Thanks, --69.218.58.44 (talk) 16:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, you were waiting to make that comment right? /Slarre (talk) 16:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, because I actually like how you reworked the first few sentences of the lead and the fact that you hadn't been reverting a lot. [[WP::LEAD]] does call for an overview with notable controversies and WP:3RR does state no three reversions to the article within 24 hours. The best place to continue discussion would probably be on the article's talk page.. --69.218.58.44 (talk) 16:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You got to be joking. You're engaging in edit war as much as I am. Why don't you just log in with your real user name or are you afraid that would expose your identity? /Slarre (talk) 18:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't post something over the 3RR limit and I was simply trying to follow the guidelines of [[WP::LEAD]]. Think whatever you want, I just didn't want it to escalate. The situation seems to have worked itself out.. --69.218.58.44 (talk) 00:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Slarre -- You reverted a change to categories that I'd done to Category:Gender equality ministries. I added it to Category:Human rights organizations. "orgs" includes both government & non-government orgs for now, although i'll be working to split those up; is there some other reason that you thought that category was problematic? --Lquilter (talk) 03:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just thought that it was a bit odd to categorize a government ministry as an "organization", and also I don't think that gender equality has that much to do with human rights really. /Slarre (talk) 20:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Gender equality is usually considered part of women's rights, which is usually considered part of human rights. I understand that these may feel a bit attenuated, but as I'm going through and trying to get the organizations category into consistency, I think the subject linking is important. As for whether a ministry is an organization, the organizations tree is a mix of non-governmental and governmental organizations. That's also inconsistent at this point; ultimately there needs to be a good structure distinguishing governmental organizations from non-governmental organizations. For now, though, I think it's helpful to track them this way. If you don't have any further objections, I'm going to reinstate the categorization. --Lquilter (talk) 06:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tjena, vill bara tacka dig för att du hjälpt till på den artikeln! — EliasAlucard (talk · contribs) 06:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tack! /Slarre (talk) 16:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... why my writing constitutes a personal attack? It makes absolutely no sense...--Leifern (talk) 22:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accusing me of promoting "nazi propaganda" when all I do is point to neutral facts is way out of the line. I agree with your political points (Quisling was a fascist, a mass murderer and not a legitimate political leader), however I don't want that point to be staten as a fact in violation of WP:NPOV. It's a well known fact that Quisling was the de facto head of government in Nazi-occupied Norway (not of the exiled government), just as Joseph Stalin was the de facto head of state of occupied Estonia. If you think that pointing this out is promoting nazi propaganda, then I don't feel any more need to discuss with you. Anyway, this isn't a very big issue for me and I won't engage in any edit wars over it. /Slarre (talk) 22:42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I wrote was that most Norwegians would consider giving Quisling any legitimacy neo-Nazi propaganda; this is also an objective fact. I made it quite clear that I did not want to speculate on your intentions. In addition to that, historians also agree that Quisling was Terboven's puppet, so if there was any de facto head of the power occuping Norway, it was Terboven, not Quisling. --Leifern (talk) 23:09, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Quisling was indeed Terboven's puppet. However, you have to differ between the head of state and head of government. As Minister President Quisling was indeed the leader of the occupying cabinet (government). How much power he had in reality is another question. /Slarre (talk) 00:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Proventus, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Proventus seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Proventus, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 02:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on America's mayor, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated America's mayor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. J-ſtan^Contribs_{User page} 18:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]