User talk:Ice Explorer

DYK for Wictor Esbensen

On February 16, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wictor Esbensen, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 04:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your kind words, Brianboulton deserves the vast majority of the credit (I just made the maps and a few tweaks). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:43, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again - you will make me blush. This time TonyTheTiger deserves most of the credit. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:54, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Images

I took a look through some of your contributions. You do great article work. I hate to see you getting frustrated by the deletion of non-free images. However, it's also important that we limit our use of non-free imagery, both for occasional legal issues but also to allow Wikipedia to be as free and unencumbered to make it more easily spreadable by anyone and by any means possible. Is there some way that I can make this frustrate you less? I'd hate to lose your article work because you get pissed off about the image deletions and leave. kmccoy (talk) 02:07, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Publisher

When adding an encyclopedia reference, please insert the name of the encyclopedia under "encyclopedia" and not "publisher". The easiest thing is to copy the entire code from an established article. Geschichte (talk) 23:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Oooooops... my bad. I'd been at it for 10 hours and my eye's were going buggy. I would have caught it later today when I went back. Thanks for the heads up. Could you help me to clarify the First Minister and Prime Minister of Norway question ? (Ice Explorer (talk) 00:00, 14 November 2009 (UTC))

See also Template:Cite encyclopedia (they do not go under "book"). Geschichte (talk) 09:27, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

This was fixed days ago. What's up dude ? (Ice Explorer (talk) 12:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC))

Waterfalls, waterfalls, waterfalls!

Feeling wikistress? Wish you could have a vacation someplace with two dozen waterfalls? Well the next best thing is here!

If you want to, please come look at pictures of waterfalls and pick which ones you like best. You'll be helping make a better article too.

Thanks, Dincher (talk) and Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

P.S. That wikilink again: User talk:Ruhrfisch/Waterfalls

Happy Thanksgiving! I am thankful for you and your contributions here! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the message. I do so wish the barn owl was "my" photo. Speaking of photos, you're responsible for side-tracking me to voting on waterfall pictures. - Hordaland (talk) 10:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Try this & lemme know if it works:

Go to: http://digitalarkivet.uib.no/cgi-win/WebFront.exe?slag=vis&tekst=meldingar

At far left, click on 'Skanna kyrkjebøker'

At bottom of text on the new page, click on 'dei skanna kyrkjebøkene'

At left in the space for 'Søk i navn på prestegjeld/sokn', write garnisonsmenigheten

At bottom, click on 'Garnisonsmenigheten / Akershus slottsmenighet: 1820-1828, Ministerialbok

Find "Ekteviede" and follow horizontally to click on '1826 (p 364-365)'

See at top of page; you have p 364-365

Use arrow to the right, twice, to p 368-369

Marriage record is next to last on p 369 numbered 33, dated 27 Sept

---

His title is Statsraad
I don't know what it says after the word Krog
3rd line: Widower, age 39 1/2 yr
4th line: Number 34/1826 in ....lysningsprotokollen (banns)

Witnesses ( best man etc. ): Statsraad [Treschow??] and Professor unreadable, ends with sen

She is Widow, can't read next word
Name from previous marr: Schiøtt
Maiden name Arbin
Age 42
Hordaland (talk) 20:45, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

• OK I've figured out why your link didn't work. It's because when you went to the page with the church record you hit the turn page right button and they use a computer program query to move the page back and forth. In plain English it means it's not a direct link page. Direct link meaning you can't use it from outside the archive.

• The good news is I've figured out how to get a direct link to the page. When you get to the church book, instead of hitting the forward and back buttons. You go to the Navigation bar and change the last number in the web address manually. This is the last number: ( side=-174 ) so now you would change it to ( side=-175 ) to go to the next page. This way you have a direct link page people can go to. Hope that made sense and you'll be able to use it in the future. I know it's a relief to know we can direct link to it. Much better for citation purposes. So here it is, the direct link.

"Akershus slottsmenighet i Garnisonsmenigheten 1820-1828" (in Norwegian). National Archives of Norway. 1820–1828. p. 369. Retrieved 20 November 2009.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: date format (link) (Ice Explorer (talk) 10:08, 20 November 2009 (UTC))

a sandbox

You may look at this page, but please don't write on it. - Hordaland (talk) 03:45, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Marienlyst Castle

Regarding your request for assistance from a Danish speaker on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Denmark, I will be most happy to help you out with the Marienlyst Castle article if you have any specific questions or requests. If I can, that is. Just write me on my talk page and I'll do my best. May I, out of sheer curiousity, ask how you stumbled upon that particular building, it's not exactly famous?Ramblersen (talk) 07:16, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

The sandbox sounds like a good idea. I've looked at it briefly and it looks good. I really hope you will take an interest in more underappreciated Danish buildings and topics in the future.:-) I would like to know precisely what you want me to contribute with, I don't like to mass with something others write if I can see it's something they have put thought and an effort into. But I can help add references and if you have some sources in Danish I can translate it and you can clean it up yourself. And of course make some general comments.Ramblersen (talk) 21:35, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

OK.. I've set up the Sandbox here. User:Ice Explorer/Sandbox3 You can write anywhere you like. I've also set up a section just below My Notes called, Ramblersen Notes, for you. In My Notes I've left some comments. You can comment after it even in My Notes. No worries... actually it's best to write comments in the area where the comment is about. You can look at my Sandbox2 to understand what I mean. If you have questions just ask. Don't worry, I'm easy going. Oooh and thanks again for wanting to help. It will make all the difference. Cheers ! (Ice Explorer (talk) 07:43, 23 November 2009 (UTC))

Oops I missed your request on my talk page. Well the thing is I have a rahter severe eye decease which makes the library and books quite a lot more of a hassle than relying on the computer for researching articles. I basically use the time I have to work on wikipedia a lot more efficiently by sticking with the internet. So I'm affraid it's a no to that one. For the same reason I'm not the right person to ask to get some more photos. Sorry about that.Ramblersen (talk) 15:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Oooh that's fine. You have been such a great help already. I've really enjoyed reading some of the stuff you found, in fact I'm going to go read some more right now. Hope you like how the Marienlyst article is coming along so far. (Ice Explorer (talk) 19:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC))

Thanks

Thank you very much for the barnstar—it is very nice to know that my work is appreciated. On a completely deferent note, I notice that you occasionally ask for translations from Norwegian. Perhaps you are not aware of services such as translate.google.com, where you can enter a URL or a text, and the program will give a rough translations. It needs a very good copyedit afterwards, but I've been able to translate Italian web sites with good enough results. If you don't like Google, I'm sure there are a hundred similar sites out there. Also, I would like to thank you for the work you've put in recently, it's impressive that a non-Norwegian takes up an interest in a small country to the north. Arsenikk ^(talk) 11:40, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Oooh, I'm well aware of translate.google.com. I had a red link on a page and wanted to offer it to someone, but mostly I wanted to see what kind of people would come out of the wood-works at WikiProject Norway. You see, not all people like working alone and sadly these are the people who often leave in frustration. I just wanted to see if their were any of them out there. As for the reason I'm interested in Scandinavia, well it's simply because it's part of my ancestry. Glad you like your barnstar, it's well deserved. Hope we'll work on something together someday. (Ice Explorer (talk) 15:30, 2 December 2009 (UTC))

Talkback

Hello, Ice Explorer. You have new messages at Headbomb's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Architecture of Denmark

Thought I would drop a line on your talk page on this as the talk page on the article has become rather difficult to sort out.

First, an apology: it was my mistake in citing Fountains in Paris as an excellent article. For some reason, I thought it had been a feature article when in fact it was just at the top of DYK. It did however impress me for its visual content - but that is probably because in areas like art and architecture, images often seem to be a vital key to understanding the text.

Secondly, I think you may have misunderstood some of my reactions to your suggestions. It was very fair of you to come in and try to support the improvement of the article. The only thing that worried me a bit was the idea of a sandbox. I cannot see exactly how this would work and that was why I wondered if you could provide examples of how it would operate in practice.

Finally, on the images, I am certainly happy to bow to the expertise of others but the advice has not always been along the same lines - and as you must know, most of the important design changes here have actually been undertaken by others. I have simply tried to tidy things up afterwards but my efforts seem to have been rather counter productive. That is why I would now like to spend more time on the text itself and come back to the images later.

So in conclusion, I hope you will not give up on this as the article really needs as much involvement as possible. And if you can help to rally more enthusiasts, it would certainly help. Ipigott (talk) 15:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughtful comment, but I'm going to take a pass on the Architecture of Denmark article for now. Perhaps in the future I will change my mind. If you're sincere about how the sandbox would work and would like me to work again on the article, might I suggest you have a look at my User:Ice Explorer/Sandbox3 where I'm working on the Marienlyst Castle article. There are a number of questions that need answers as well as new resources found and translations. You can comment anywhere just put them in brackets like so (This is my comment. Ipigott). I have set up a Ipigott Notes section at the bottom of the page should you wish to add some notes comments or references, whatever you like. Thanks again for stopping by, sincerely, (Ice Explorer (talk) 13:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC))

Glad you got back to me again on all this. And thanks for pointing me to your sandbox on Marienlyst. I have just had a quick look through it and see that apart from some minor edits by Ramblersen, virtually all the work is your own. But now you've invited me in, I might be able to help out a bit too - and that will make three of us. I hope I'll find time to help you out on what seems to be a very promising enterprise. Ipigott (talk) 14:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Cheers, look forward to seeing you about. Since I'm in Canada and can't do this myself. What I need is for someone to get a book about Marienlyst from a Danish library, then scan or transcribe the relevant parts, so we can finish the last two paragraphs that are missing some info. Any ideas ? (Ice Explorer (talk) 21:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC))

On Marienlyst, have you any time schedule? And what exactly are you aiming for first: DYK, or GA/FA? It might be good to go for DYK first if you can demonstrate a substantial expansion of the article over a few weeks - although I realise it is only a few weeks since you created the article. This often provides useful feedback and more collaborators. I was wondering if you would like to take another look at Architecture of Denmark. I think you will find that we have followed up on a lot of what you suggested. The prose has been carefully revised and the pictures are less numerous and overpowering. I would, nevertheless, welcome any further comments, preferably on the article's talk page. Ipigott (talk) 09:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I've never thought of DYK as a goal. It's merely a novelty thing, tho I would like to be the one to nominate it. The decision on FA or GA will be decided after consultation. I'm super busy this weekend and already have a backlog of projects at the moment so I'm not sure if I'll return just yet but I will have a re-read through the entire article because you asked. Sincerely, (Ice Explorer (talk) 09:46, 12 December 2009 (UTC))

• I've read the article again and did notice it was much improved and it pleased me to see it. Here are some quick notes I jotted down whilst reading:

Some prose

Some prose reads like a list. It should mention why it is interesting or famous not just that it is famous. (Gothic style was interesting; "false doors, dead-end corridors, murder-holes for pouring boiling pitch over the attackers")

Good point: I'll look into it and try to make it more interesting.

Kronborg

Kronborg should be called Kronborg Castle or Kronborg fortress. It should also have a slightly larger paragraph due to it's fame and notability (UNESCO World Heritage Site).

For the Danes, it's just Kronborg as -borg itself means castle. But you may be right that is should be called Kronborg Castle in English. I'll change it.

th century

Please avoid using " ^th century " so often in one paragraph like here: (Renaissance) Holbæk in northwestern Sealand began to develop towards the end of the 13th century. Prosperity continued in the 17th century as corn grown locally was traded with Germany and Holland. The hlaf-timbered houses which now form the town's museum date back to the 17th century, providing an insight into how the town functioned at that time.

I agree that this looks rather overdone. Will try to cut down on "th century".

Place names

Place names like Præstø, Sealand, need to be changed to the proper English names as the letters are unfamiliar to English speakers. This applies to all words in the entire article unless in brackets like so, Hotel Marienlyst (Marienlyst Kurog Søbad). If the original article link has incorrectly spelled it using Danish letters you still should have the correct English spelling in your article. I personally am fine if you use Danish letters in a persons name but some might reject this as well specially when letters like æ are used.

Here there seems to be a conflict between European usage and North American usage. Certainly in the EU, we always try to use the correct lettering, even if it looks unusual to a native English speaker. It also helps a great deal with search. Just take the example of Møn. Searching on the correct sequence provides the hits you are looking for while searching on Mon provides garbage. Nevertheless, if this is established Wikipedia policy, I suppose I could go along with it, provided the correct Scandinavian spellings are included in brackets or italics. I'll try to research the issue further.

On the anglicisation of place names, etc., see Anglicisation#Place_names, it looks as if Wikipedia increasingly prefers original spellings. There may be a case for including anglicised spellings too, especially in the titles of articles where there are wikilinks (e.g. via redirects). It will be interesting to see how the others react. Would you, by the way, prefer references to Helsingør to use the Shakespearian Elsinore? Ipigott (talk) 17:58, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

• Yes you're right. I personally think the names should use the original spelling to a certain extent but what we need to consider is what people will say during the review. Letters like æ are a bit to foreign but letters like ø are fine. I would suggest some more research into this. For example take into account how Google maps spells it but also find an up to date American map source and British source. If you really want to do some good research look into how the Canadians spell it as well as the Australians and New Zealander's spell it. Then keep your research so you can use it during the articles review. (Ice Explorer (talk) 04:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC))

Initials before peoples names

Avoid the use of initials before peoples names like this, C.F. Hansen. Do some research to find out the full name. If you can't find it, then they are probably not notable enough to be in the article in the first place and should be removed.

This is also an item where there are different opinions. I had initially included the full names of these people but in Danish they are invariably referred to with their initials, cf H.C. Andersen. Only a day or two ago, Ramblersen edited Nikolaj Frederik Severin Grundtvig back to N.F.S. Grundtvig as they all call him in Denmark. I'll try to research this further too, especially usage within the English Wikipedia itself. (In Europe, we have to cope with the problem the other way round when we see abbreviations such as N.Y. for New York or JFK for Kennedy!)

• With all due respect, Ramblersen lacks awareness of the big picture and is very centric in her views. I would suggest making a decision about how you wish to name people in the article then be consistent from the beginning of the article to the end. Also make a statement about your naming conventions on the talk page. A good idea is to also make a statement about what type of English spelling the article uses. Either American or British spelling. Then the rules are clear for everyone editing the page. Be bold and make sure these rules are clearly stated at the top of the page so it's the first thing people read. (Ice Explorer (talk) 04:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC))

(Ice Explorer (talk) 10:50, 12 December 2009 (UTC))

Very thankful to you for taking the time and trouble to get back to me on this. You'll see my initial reactions below each of your bullet points above but on a couple of them I really need to do more research. I've also copied your message over to the Architecture of Denmark talk page so that we can see how others react. Ipigott (talk) 17:24, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

• You're most welcome. (Ice Explorer (talk) 04:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC))

Page design

Hi! I found this page today: Wikipedia:User page design center. It has a few tips on page design—perhaps you will enjoy it. Arsenikk ^(talk) 21:15, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Very cool, thanks a million! (Ice Explorer (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2009 (UTC))

Suggestion

Thanks for the message you left re William Speirs Bruce. I have written a fair number of Antarctic/Arctic expedition histories and biographies, though in the last 12 months I have tended to work in other fields. However, I have started a new project to expand the Karluk article into a full account of that sorry expedition, and have further plans for next year. It is a long-term goal to create a featured topic for the Heroic Age of Antarctic Exploration. At the moment the parent article is a Featured List, and eight of the expeditions are Featured Articles. That leaves another eight articles, all at present stub or Start-class, to be raised to GA or FA. These are: Australasian Antarctic Expedition, Amundsen's South Pole expedition, Belgian Antarctic Expedition, Second German Antarctic Expedition, Swedish Antarctic Expedition, Gauss Expedition, Japanese Antarctic Expedition and two Charcot Expeditions which can be conflated to a single article.

Would you consider working with me on one or more of these, with FA status as the objective? If you are interested, choose whichever you think you'd most enjoy working on, and we'll make that the first - only don't choose the Japanese expedition where there are serious sourcing issues. As to timing. I won't be able to do substantial work until about March, as I have a couple of other things to do first. So please take your time, decide what you would like to do and let me know. Brianboulton (talk) 16:25, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I love the subject and believe FA should always be the goal. My choice would naturally be Amundsen's South Pole expedition, but then I'm biased in that regard. I've had a look at all your Sandboxes and find it very clean and orderly, compared to my User:Ice_Explorer/Sandbox3. Where do you put all your research ? Do you have a preferred way of working together with others ? Do you pick who will be the copy-editor, online researcher, ect., before hand ? You mention you won't be able to do substantial work till March. Could you give me a general idea of what substantial means in this case ? I ask because I have no problem doing heavy research and basic layout preparation. Let me know your thoughts. Sincerely, (Ice Explorer (talk) 17:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC))

Well, the Amundsen expedition article is probably the most important Heroic Age article that hasn't been upgraded, and would be the logical place to start. The article is not in good shape - only 2,000 words of text, cleanup banners, hardly any inline citations, etc, and I think it will need to be completely rewritten. I won't be able to do much research or writing for a couple of months, but I can help in identifying resources, images etc, and can assist in developing an appropriate structure and in other initial tasks. When I am planning an expansion of an existing article I usually place a message on the article's talk page explaining what I am doing and inviting other editors to make appropriate suggestions (very few do, but it's a courtesy). If you have existing ideas and want to get started on them, I'm happy to go along with you. Incidentally, can you do maps? That would be a wonderful skill to contribute: at the moment all my maps are outsourced to Ruhrfisch, but I can't rely on his goodwill indefinitely. Brianboulton (talk) 01:05, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Nice question, I've not thought about maps in a long time. My father was a geophysicist and worked with maps everyday, even when at home, so you could say I learned how to read maps before I could read books. Making them is however an entirely different matter as I was never very good at drawing. I also don't have Adobe Illustrator which makes it difficult. So I guess what I'm saying, is that, if it needs to be drawn from scratch then I'm not the person for the job, but I could work with a simple map and then create a map from that. Does that make sense ? Perhaps it's the perfectionist in me speaking, hence my disclaimer. Just ask and I'll let you know if it's above my skill level or not. With regards to the Amundsen article, I'll have a look about and prepare my mind for the task, then leave a message on the talk page. In the spirit of WP:Bold I'll also set up a sandbox whilst we discuss the structure and what the best way to proceed would be. Let me know your thoughts. Cheers, (Ice Explorer (talk) 18:33, 11 December 2009 (UTC))

Your contributed article, List of Danish language writers

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, List of Danish language writers. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - List of Danish authors. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at List of Danish authors - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Glenfarclas (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you fail to understand the English language. Writers by language means by language. Danish Authors means by nationality. Big difference! By your criteria you should also delete all the pages in the Category:Lists of writers by language. I look forward to watching you tell them all that their Category is no longer valid. By the way I really appreciate you wasting my time like this. (Ice Explorer (talk) 22:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC))

The page is now deleted! You people are the reason why so many are leaving Wikipedia. You didn't even give me time to write a reply on the Talk Page some 10 minutes later! WAKE UP! (Ice Explorer (talk) 22:12, 11 December 2009 (UTC))

• Hey, take it easy: WP:WNI. I'd suggest you add a small section to List of Danish authors to cover what you're trying to do. Or, if there really are that many Danish-language authors who are not also Danish authors, maybe work on the page for a while at User:Ice Explorer/List of Danish-language authors so you have more than one person, and then bring it back to the article mainspace. It was nothing personal. --Glenfarclas (talk) 22:16, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Did it ever occur to you that I was working on it at the time or how about the idea that language and nationality are different and you should apologize for the oversight regardless of how many are on the list, or even better, put the list back. Nothing personal, just take ownership of your actions and in future slow down and think before you act. (Ice Explorer (talk) 22:35, 11 December 2009 (UTC))

• Yes, I thought of all of those things, and I totally own my actions on this one. Sorry. And although I can't restore the article, you can explore some of your options at Wikipedia:Recreation of previously deleted pages and Wikipedia:Deletion review. Best of luck. --Glenfarclas (talk) 22:51, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Is that an apology? The language makes it unclear. (Ice Explorer (talk) 23:08, 11 December 2009 (UTC))

• No, not at all; I just regret that you got so upset over this. --Glenfarclas (talk) 23:19, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Good weasel sentence, guess that about sums your thought process up. (Ice Explorer (talk) 23:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC))

• Good luck to you in the future, Ice Explorer. I won't continue to respond in this conversation. --Glenfarclas (talk) 23:25, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Nope, didn't think you were man enough to apologize. Way to show off those administrator skills, thus making Wikipedia a nice place to be. (Ice Explorer (talk) 23:29, 11 December 2009 (UTC))

• Okay, I'll respond here just to say that I'm not an administrator, only an average Wikipedian like you. Please don't think anything I've said or done reflects on Wikipedia in general or its administrators. FWIW, the administrator who deleted your article was User:SchuminWeb. --Glenfarclas (talk) 23:33, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Interesting how the administrator could delete the page within minutes of you tagging it and despite it having a {{hangon}} placed on the page. Even more interesting was how he could delete the page so fast yet not have the decency to even reply to my comments here. (Ice Explorer (talk) 03:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC))

Another perfect example of the typical deletionists behavior. No accountability, lack of awareness, denial, no discussion before deletion and of course no interest in apologizing whatsoever. (Ice Explorer (talk) 03:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC))

Schuminweb is a ----. Don't bother waiting for a reply. He prefers to block those who don't agree with him, rather than have a discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by

Adolph Peter Adler

Hi Ice Explorer. Just saw the above article via New Page Patrol: good work, it looks very well done. I notice though that the name is spelled differently in the title and body text: Adolph and Adolf. Searching Google Books, Adolph seems to be the commoner spelling (compare Adolf) - should the spelling be changed in the article? Gonzonoir (talk) 16:29, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Ooops... my bad, I'll fix it now. (Ice Explorer (talk) 16:36, 14 December 2009 (UTC))

Somethings funny here. How did it get changed? A mystery or Wiki editor slight of hand. (Ice Explorer (talk) 13:32, 16 December 2009 (UTC))

I still see the "Adolf" spelling in the Sources section, and some footnotes. Gonzonoir (talk) 16:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

The footnotes use the spelling from the books. If someone wants to improve the page, change the name it's fine with me. I was just cleaning up all the red links on the Søren Kierkegaard page because we are trying to save it from being delisted as a FA. It's one of the only Danish FA's and would be a great loss in my opinion. If you could spare a moment to help with the Søren Kierkegaard page it would be greatly appreciated. (Ice Explorer (talk) 16:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC))

Sorry, I should have realised that would be the case with the footnotes. I will look in at [[[Søren Kierkegaard]] when I get a moment. Good luck with it. Gonzonoir (talk) 16:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Cheers! (Ice Explorer (talk) 16:32, 16 December 2009 (UTC))

Seasons Greetings

	<font=3> Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and all the best in 2010! Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 23:12, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Things you can do.png

Thank you for uploading File:Things you can do.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 05:46, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Are you kidding me or did you forget to read ? Wake up ! (Ice Explorer (talk) 05:48, 31 December 2009 (UTC))

Yes I did read it. Quite throughly too. Now add a license tag please. -FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 06:43, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

What part of the description don't you understand and why are you wasting my time for a header image that I'm using in a sandbox ?

Description

For my user page

Source

I (Ice Explorer (talk)) created this work entirely by myself.

Date

5:15 am, 10 December 2009, Thursday (21 days ago) (UTC−5)

Author

Ice Explorer (talk)

(Ice Explorer (talk) 06:48, 31 December 2009 (UTC))

It surprises me rather so to find that an established editor as yourself does not know that all media files (I don't care where you put it) must have a license tag. Please add one and be civil, or I'm afraid I'll have to block you for disruption. -FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 06:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

It says clearly "I (Ice Explorer (talk)) created this work entirely by myself". So what's the problem ? (Ice Explorer (talk) 07:02, 31 December 2009 (UTC))

The fact that the file is missing a license tag. Sure, you might have created the work yourself, but in order to keep it on Wikipedia, you need to specifically note what kind of license the file is released under. I suggest you visit WP:ICTIC and add the appropriate tag. -FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 07:08, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

What I find interesting is how all my other 14 files have the PD self tag and this one all of a sudden disappeared. Interesting how the file was uploaded 20 days ago and all has been fine till I said you didn't read it, then poof, it was gone. I suggest if the tag is so important to you then you put it there or remove the deletion tag and ask politely on the talk page to request that one be put on it and provide the proper link and an explanation of how it should done. Otherwise, should the image be deleted, I will report your abuse of Admin privileges and no longer contribute to Wikipedia. Sincerely, (Ice Explorer (talk) 13:56, 31 December 2009 (UTC))

Fastily doesn't understand that the image uploaded isn't copyrightable in the first place, and so no license is needed to use it. Thparkth (talk) 17:51, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I've had it Wikipedia !

Sorry but the Editors are so small minded, abusive and bullying, I can no longer contribute to Wikipedia. For the friendly ones here I thank you for sharing. Best of luck. (Ice Explorer (talk) 07:14, 31 December 2009 (UTC))

Frederik Ludvig Liebenberg

Hello, Ice Explorer. I have just read your message about quitting Wikipedia. I hope you have second thoughts on this as it was always a pleasure to see your interest in Scandinavia, Denmark and culture and to receive positive criticism from you.

Anyway, as I didn't know you were no longer around, I spent the last couple of days tidying up your article on Liebenberg. It was not an easy job. The Googlerized translation into English was virtually useless and I had to back to the original. I think it's now more or less OK.

I was intrigued by your interest in this person. Is there a family connection? If not, in which context did you come across him?

The article could probably benefit from a bit more work, especially inputs from other sources.

Bonne chance! Ipigott (talk) 15:04, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Sometime the people here are too much, that's all. They give the Wiki police badge to just about anyone who has a need for control and a liking for tyrannical behavior. Anyhoo, it was nice of you to work on the article. I was just working on getting rid of some red links on the Søren Kierkegaard article, which is the only Danish Featured Article. It's up for review and it would be sad if it lost it's FA status. Speaking of WikiProject Denmark, I'm working on a new layout for it and would like your thoughts. It's almost done but I'm having some difficulty with how it displays in Internet Explorer browsers. Nothing unusual, just a pain. I still have no idea how anyone uses that crappy browser. The Sandbox is here. Just leave your comments on the talk page. Sincerely, (Ice Explorer (talk) 20:51, 11 January 2010 (UTC))