User talk:Jt

SEMI-RETIRED

This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia as of September 2011.

I'm not monitoring my talk page on a regular basis. If you need to reach me, please send me a wikimail. I might return occasionally during long IRL-vacations.

Best regards, Jt (talk) 19:06, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge templates[edit]

The date syntax is: {{Merge|any other arguments|date=December 2007}}, but if you leave the date off it will be added by a WP:BOT. Rich Farmbrough, 16:13 30 December 2007 (GMT).

Wikimania 2010 could be coming to Stockholm![edit]

I'm leaving you a note as you may be interested in this opportunity.

People from all six Nordic Wiki-communities (sv, no, nn, fi, da and is) are coordinating a bid for Wikimania 2010 in Stockholm. I'm sending you a message to let you know that this is occurring, and over the next few months we're looking for community support to make sure this happens! See the bid page on meta and if you like such an idea, please sign the "supporters" list at the bottom. Tack (or takk), and have a wonderful day! Mike H. Fierce! 09:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SSL/TLS and RC4[edit]

Tack så mycket :) -- 24.174.24.66 (talk) 12:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Varsågod. :)

3kV in Sweden[edit]

It seems that user 121.102.47.39 is just writing junk, for example also in 15 kV AC railway electrification.-- Bk1 168 (talk) 05:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He seems to be mixing reasonable edits with his loony racist remarks. I guess he will either grow up or he will do some really disruptive edits and get himself blocked. Br, Jt (talk) 16:45, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe he wants to promote his racist remarks in this manner. But they remain off topic in the tech-articles. And possibly neutrality is not given in areas where they are on-topic.--Bk1 168 (talk) 18:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jag tror att vår vänn har vanföreställningnar. Han skriver den samma sak igen och igen i många artikler.--Bk1 168 (talk) 08:09, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ja, det verkar så... Har du koll på hur processen funkar här på enwp för att få tag i en admin som kan överväga att ge honom en blockeringsvarning. På svwp hade jag tagit upp saken på BOÅ, men jag vet inte hur det funkar här. Mvh, Jt (talk) 13:35, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nej, det vet ja inte. Jag skriver mycket i tysk Wikipedia och där vet ja hur det funkar. Men i svensk och engelsk Wikipedia vet jag lite om hur det funkar. Vi måste fråger någon som prater engelska som firsta språket och som är mycket aktivt.--Bk1 168 (talk) 14:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question for administrator[edit]

{{adminhelp}} Me and Bk1 168 (talk) have a problem with 121.102.47.39 (talk · contribs · logs) who despite warnings continues to add non-sense to railway articles, sometimes mixed with seemingly sensible edits. We are looking for an admin to hand out a stern warning and if the behavior continues, block the user for disruption. But we are not familiar with the process for this on enwp as it is not our primary wikies. Please advice us what to do.

Thanks in advance for your help. Br, Jt (talk) 15:05, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to make an entry at the Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents, which has a lot of administrators watching it, if nothing else. Although I must admit that it's difficult to see an issue requiring immediate administrative action, because the alleged disruptive edits seem to be few and far between. Some example diffs for the disruptive edits would be helpful, as they may seem perfectly reasonable to a layperson like myself. decltype (talk) 15:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(EC)

I don't think that all of their edits are 'bad', and not being an expert, it is hard for me to check which are.

What you should do is, appropriately 'warn' then, using a standard template. You could use {{uw-error3}} perhaps, if you think that is appropriate - so you would put {{subst:uw-error3}} onto their talk page. You might also choose the level 1 or 2 version of that, and maybe a later follow-up. See WP:WARN.

If you can please use those warning templates (or whichever is appropriate), I hope that they will then discuss things. If they do not, and you've given a 'final warning', please ask on WP:AIV.

If this is unclear, and you'd like me to 'warn' for you, just let me know - but I'll need to understand exacty which edits are wrong and why.

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 ► 15:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I respect your opinion, but still feel the issue may be too complex for WP:AIV. I could very well be wrong. decltype (talk) 15:40, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The issue we are discussing here is no brutal vandalism, such as arbritrarily deleting stuff or putting in obscene vocabulary or so. No evil minded or bad person, just someone who for whatever reason wants to promote some ideas he has in mind. Ideas which I think we could expose in the discussion as being wrong or off-topic for Wikipedia (or both). Here we have stuff added with the language of the article and some technical knowledge, which makes it hard for non specialists to judge that it is wrong. Ok, part of the edits contain some connetion to between technical and non-technical issues that would sound strange even to most of those who are not railroad-specialists. Anyway, I would even say that 60% of the edits are ok. But when there is a pageful of history for a series of minor edits, then it gets really hard to find out which are the ones that are destructive and which not. For people with the knowledge of the subject it is not really hard to tell, which edits are invented or wishful thinking or mixing up phantasy with reality or whatever, but the same couple of ideas, that are obviously wrong for those who know about the matter, but look like the rest of the material to those, who are starting to deal with the material, comes in again and again. Since the volume of the articles is quite substantial and other, useful edits take place, it becomes hard to fix the wrong edits, especially if one can expect that they will sneak in again some time later in another article, where it fits. And I see an absolute reluctance to learn about this, just some kind of tactical smartness to avoid too much confrontation. So the sad story is, that the benefit of the useful edits is more than eaten up by the effort to cleanup the destructive edits.--Bk1 168 (talk) 21:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Alph Bot: Exercise Zapad-81[edit]

Hello there, thanks for the reporting. The case is that the script follows the IW's and on the other projects searches for IW's that aren't on en.wp, and if not, adds them. In that particular case, on the other project's pages that are linked to en article, the iw was there, and so he added here. Removing it from en will not fix it completely, because other iw bots will add it again, since the code is the same. The case is that bot's haven't the human intelligence, and sometimes need the human help. I'm not familiar with the languages linked, could you perform a check on those iw's and clean it? That way, my bot or any other iw bot won't do the same again. Thanks in advantage. Alchimista ^{talk with me} 00:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]