User talk:KarlXII

TWA Flight 800 Mieciu K 22:11, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Please see the Discussion page for WP:WOT. Feel free to delete this comment at any time (your TP is nice and neat). Haizum 19:13, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

WOT

Had to look for it but here is the answer to your question.

Result of the previous debate was:

• 16-10 are saying that Iraq is not part of the War on Terror and therefore the infobox should not state it as such.[1]
• 14-4 are saying that Iraq is not part of the War on Terror and therefore the infobox should not state it as such.[2]
• 10-3 WMD was the prominent -that is most important- reason advanced by the Bush administration to invade Iraq.[3]

This is repeatedly deleted, apparently people are not allowed to judge for themselves what this debate is about and that the subject was decided against including Iraq I restore the reference to previous discussions in the hope that an homest and unbiased debate is possible. For the previous debate for what this poll is really trying to address:[4][5][6][7] [8][9] Nomen Nescio^{Gnothi seauton} 09:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

About Bosnian massacre

I realize this is a very important topic for a lot of people. However, at 105 k the article is waaaay too long. See MediaWiki:Longpagewarning and Wikipedia:Article size. Any suggestions for shortening the article and making it more concise? The very long and detailed "The massacre" section could perhaps be shortened?KarlXII 22:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean?(cantikadam 08:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC))

The role of foreign fighters in the Bosnian war

I have made the requested The role of foreign fighters in the Bosnian war, but somebody now wants to merge it. You can put a comment on the talk page if u like...--Boris Johnson VC 15:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Edit warring at Srebrenica massacre

Hi Karl. Please do not engage in edit warring at our article about the Srebrenica massacre. This is contrary to the rules here. Instead, use the talk page at Talk:Srebrenica massacre to discuss your concerns. Thank you. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 00:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I'll do so in the future. However, i think this page could be improved, not so much regarding content but with wording, emphasis and perspectives taken.KarlXII 13:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I see you've met with our ever-vigilant guardians of one of the worst Wikipedia articles ever. Just to let you know that I agree with your assertions on the talk page, but I don't think I could help you with actual editing of the article. Nikola 10:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Hej

Hej KarlXII, kul att se ytterliggare en svensk här. Såg att du hade råkat ut för att bli misstagen för att vara någon annan (Osli). Sånt händer tyvärr ofta bara man delar någon annans åsikt som några inte kan stå ut med bara för de inte överensstämmer med sin egna patriotiska tolkning. Vilka historia områden är dina djupaste intressen, frågar bara av ren nyfikenhet. Ha en bra helg. - Litany 21:06, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Hej Litany,

jo jag har förstått att Srebrenica massacre artikeln är lite 'känslig' och att vissa lätt tar till fula ord och påhopp. Synd, för artikeln är egentligen ganska bra, men dras ned av ett allt för tendentiöst språk och faktapresentation.

Främsta intresseområdena är medeltida europeisk historia. Främst nordisk och västeuropeisk. Har på sistone försökt läsa på lite mer om östeuropas medeltida historia (tyvärr är det inte helt lätt att hitta bra material på området), främst Byzantium och Ottomanerna, men även medeltida Balkan.

Själv då? KarlXII 10:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Jo du vet ju kanske att det gäller det mesta som rör Kosovo här också. Särskilt synd är det att folk inte är interesserade av att diskutera utan bara sprida propaganda.

Okej, själv är jag mest intresserad av Balkans medeltidshistoria och Sveriges stormaktstid. Men jag är generellt interesserad av det mesta av dessa områden och dess historia allmänt, hela Europas historia från stenåldern till modern tid fascinerar mig.

Det finns väldigt bra böcker om Balkans medeltid, inkluderat Byzantium och Ottomanska riket, av en amerikansk författare, som jag köpte här i Kroatien, och de är på engelska vilket underlättar väldigt mycket. - Litany 16:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Förlåt, glömde säga att författaren till dessa böcker heter John Fine och arbetar vid University of Minnesota. Litany 18:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Tackar så mycket för tipset.KarlXII 19:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Hahahahahha inget liv jävla nööööööörd han går o skaffar "Litany" account o sen skrivet till sig själv! Hahahahhahahah skaffa liv fucking tönt ahahahhahahahahahha ja dör av garv

Svear vs Swedes

Hi Karl XII. I have responded on the talkpages, but could just was well leave the message here, too. Swedes is the most common name used for the "svear" in English, and "Swedish-Geatish wars" is the standard term for these wars. Just try googling if you don't believe me. Swedes is also since a long time back the preferred translation of svear at Wikipedia:Swedish Wikipedians' notice board/Terminology. Don't equate Swedes with "svenskar". Swedes means both "svear" and "svenskar", just as svenskar did in the middle ages. For instance, in Västgötalagen a "svensk man" was NOT a Geat. Moreover, when Geats are discussed, "Swedes" is unambiguous and there is no risk for confusion.--Berig 15:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Berig, Hmm... I'm not convinced. Yes, the Wikipedia:Swedish Wikipedians' notice board/Terminology certainly does say that "Svear" is synonymous with "Swedes" in English and you say that I shouldn't equate Swedes with svenskar and that in English Swedes means both "svear" and "svenskar", just as svenskar did in the middle ages. I have two objections about equating Svear with Swedes:

1. in Swedish (the modern language, that is) "svear" and "svenskar" are two different things. "Svear" refers to people who lived in the Mälardalen region and Uppland while "svenskar" refers to Swedes, today typically defined as citizens of Sweden or people who have Swedish as their mother tongue. In the historical sense, "svenskar" in Swedish (again, I am talking about modern Swedish) is typically used to describe ethnic Swedes/speakers of Swedish. Thus, to equate, as you propose, "Svear" with "Swedes" in English is not in accordance with how it is treated in modern Swedish.
2. that someone (I believe it was Wigalf) has written that "svear" in Swedish should be called "Swedes" in English in doesn't make it true. Especially since the translation you cite is not backed up by any sources or examples (in modern Swedish that is). Yes, I know that medieval sources often eqated "svear" with "svenskar" but that doesn't mean this should be done today (heck, the Greeks of Byzantium often called themselves Romans, this doesn't mean that we should too).

If modern Swedish differentiates between "Swedes" and "Svear" (where Svear is a subset of Swedes) shouldn't English Wikipedia do the same? KarlXII 20:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

The subject where most English speakers become familiar with Svear is Beowulf and there you simply have to stick to conventional terminology. There are many people who want to change the terminology of the English language on Wikipedia (especially nationalists), but they are usually turned down by a simple googling.--Berig 20:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Berig, I'm not familiar with Beowoulf and don't know whether it really is the case that this is where most people become acquainted with the term "Svear". However, the use of Svear in Beowoulf shouldn't dictate how it should be used in modern English. My point remains, if modern Swedish refers to Svear as a subset of Swedes (do agree with this), shouldn't modern English do the same?

Here a text from Encyclopedia Britannica in Sweden: Settlement patterns:

Götaland and Svealand, the two southernmost of Sweden's traditional regions, take their names from small, prehistoric clans who inhabited central Sweden. The Svear and the Götar (believed by some scholars to be the original Goths) were united into one state about AD 1000. The Götar lived in Östergötland, Västergötland, and Småland, and the Svear around Lake Mälaren. Certain differences remain in the dialects spoken in these two regions.

What is the comment about nationalists referring to? KarlXII 20:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Just check a few articles relating to East European geography and you'll see what I mean.--Berig 21:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It could also be worthwhile to read this in Encyclopedia Britannica online about Sweden's history during the 12th, 13th, and 14th centuries. It refers to the Svear as separate from Sweden and Swedes.KarlXII 20:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Look at this (google is set to search only for English language pages):

• +svear +götar 158 google hits[10]
• +svear +geats 133 google hits[11]
• +swedes +götar 201 google hits[12]
• +swedes +geats 9860 google hits[13]

This is much more revealing as to the preferred English terminology on WP.--Berig 21:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm moving the discussion to the Svear page, as it would seem that is where it belongs.KarlXII 22:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Srebrenica

Hi. I really have no time and energy to waste on that article. There are few ultra-nationalist Bosniak users here on Wikipedia and every serious discussion with them is impossible. However, if you really want to deal with them, there is a way: you can ask for arbitration about that article from some neutral admins. It was recently done with Kosovo article and it resulted that all disruptive editors on that article were blocked from editing. Such arbitration could be done with Srebrenica massacre too. PANONIAN (talk) 14:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know (yet) about "ultranationalist", but I'm beginning to agree with "impossible." At first I though I didn't have the time to waste but have since reconsidered since I don't like being bullied. Put I have to admit that it's lonely on that playground. Thank's for the recommendation about arbitration. The problem isn't, as I mentioned above, that there are big chunks of incorrect information, just that the choice of facts to present, their wording and how other facts are presented, which is POV.

I'll study the Kosovo article arbitration process. Any good admins to recommend? KarlXII 14:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that Pax will join in your line of work in one of the worst massacres in history. Why, because I don't think while he retired that he will get too involved with an article that requires much info. Besides, Bosniak info is actually more accurate than Serb info because the Serbs tend to lie about things more than the Bosniaks do. I could help out if you wanted me to, besides, I agree with you about it being to POV (on the Bosniak side). --Crna Gora 20:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, CrnaGora's right. However, if there is something precise that you need (a specified thing/matter/question), don't be a stranger. --PaxEquilibrium 00:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, it generally not the facts which are wrong, it's which facts get presented and which don't and how they are presented. To begin with, I have issues with the 6 topics raised on the Talk page recently. Of course, there's more. As for whether Serbs or Bosniaks "tend to lie about things more" I see absolutely no call for that type of language.KarlXII 09:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I suggest you stop edit war and vandalism at Srebrenica Genocide page

This is a courtesy warning. Next time I will complain to admin's and ask them to take action against you and block your access. Vandalism and edit-wars are not tolerated on wikipedia. Bosniak 09:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Bosniak,

That your definition of "vandalism" is any edit not in line with your opinion is quite apparent. I have explaied all of my edits on the Talk page. Maybe an arbitration committee would be the best option.KarlXII 09:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow, what a hypocrite... it's sad to see how unreasonable some people can be due to nationalism and hate... I must say it's inspiring to see you battle with such ignorance though... keep up the good work Karl. Stop The Lies 10:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Stop_The_Lies

Thank's! People who try to intimidate and bully others is one of the worst things I know.KarlXII 08:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Ser att du fortsätter att få skit från bosnierna. Helt otroligt att de alltid ska se sig som "the good guys" att de inte ser när de beter sig som värsta nationalisterna själva.Osli73 23:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)