User talk:Inge

	Archives
	1 2 3 4

I prefer to keep conversations on one talk page. As the size of this talk page has gotten out of hand before I will try to archive sections as the issues they bring up are resolved.

Country creation lists

Yeah that's a quandry. It should be one list. No doubt about that. But what should it be labeled? Independence doesn't quite work since I know that in the case of Egypt, it has been non-independent on and off over time. But then is it a "State". I dunno. I would recommend combining everything into one list and then try to build a consensus for the name. Otherwise yes, the countries listed are almost the exact same. It's redundant. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 17:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ingrid Ragvaldsdotter and Jarl Knut Haakonsson

Hello! Unless I am mistaken, you have written on Norwegian medieval topics before? I was wondering if I could direct your attention to the discussion-pages of the two articles Jarl Knut Haakonsson and Ingrid Ragvaldsdotter, and see if you have any opinions on the question of moving them to Knut Haakonsson and Ingrid Ragnvaldsdotter? Thank you! --Barend 15:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answered on those pages.Inge 08:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shetland

I popped some figures on the talk page to show you why the claim you are inserting doesn't make sense. --Guinnog 23:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nearest railway station to Shetland

Sorry, but you've been taken in by an urban myth, just as that webpage has... It is approx 220 miles from Shetland to Bergen, but it is only approx 130 miles to the railway station at Thurso (Thurso railway station) on the Scottish mainland. I'm going to revert your edit, thanks/wangi 23:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer to keep discussions about particular articles on the talk page of that article. I have answered there. Inge 23:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

I gather from your last post at Talk:Shetland you were put out by being corrected on the Lerwick error. I want to say that it was certainly not my intention to offend you. --Guinnog 00:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Inge 00:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correcting mistakes is of course important and I am not put out by being corrected. But the manor by which it its done matters a great deal, espeshially when we are limited to communicate by writing. Calling well sourced posts rubbish and making jokes on how silly a mistake this was to make is not encouraging. It might pass better among a group of friends face to face, but should be avoided here. I see you were only enticed into making a small comment and I get the impression you know what Im trying to say here already. It really isnt a big deal or problem.

My other point is that the problem wasn't me posting it the problem is that a reputable reference site ment to inform Brits and Norwegians on such things have gotten it wrong.Inge 00:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Civility is really important on a project like this, which is why I apologised above for any upset you suffered for your well-meaning attempt to improve the encyclopedia. I would make two observations here:

1) While verifiability is our standard here, it's obviously even more important to be accurate. Even apparently-respectable sources can be wrong, and as I pointed out on the talk page, this is the organisation that produced the Dodgy Dossier here!

2) You perhaps didn't help the situation by reverting our attempts to correct you rather than raising it in talk.

Anyway, I do understand why you were put out and I hope no lasting ill feeling will derive from this incident. Best wishes, --Guinnog 01:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1) Obviously, but I don't suspect you make a habit of questioning such sources as hard as others. (I would call the British Foreign Office a straight forward respectable source even though some parts of that organisation have made some widely publicised mistakes.)

2)Perhaps. I normally only revert once in cases like this (the removing editor referred to himself believing it to be a myth, when I had read it in a reputable source) and then take it to the talk page, but then the following edit summary was "no mention of that on the ref you provided". I knew that to be completely false and felt justified in making a second revert. I would however have taken it to the talk page had you not beaten me to it. When a possible mistake is backed up by a strong source maybe all parties share the obligation to take it to the talk page early (maybe even before it is removed the first time?).Inge 01:39, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't harbour grudges and I don't think any are justified here:) Cheers! Inge 01:39, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you for your politeness and understanding:)Inge 01:51, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007

The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Mass tagging articles the easy way

Hi Inge

It looks like you've won the task of tagging the Norwegian material just like I seem to have won tagging the Danish. If you plan to add the Norwegian banner to bigger chuncks of material, I can recommend trying AWB and Kingboyd's plugin. You need to be apply to use AWB, but that will not be any problem. The plugin can simply be downloaded but requires that you've already been approved for AWB and that you add your name on the list of users.

This combination allows you to create bigger lists of articles to be tagged and to do it semi-automatically. You still need to approve every edit but you can forget about the edit summaries. The method that worked best for me was to create one big list of all the potential material (remember to save it) and work on it from time to time. The bot notices if an article talk page is already tagged, so no sorting is needed in that regard. This method was the only way I got through the WP:HV material. I'm trying to do the bigger Danish material as well but it will take a few weeks. If you feel like trying AWB, I'll be glad to give you a few tips. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 23:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page.Inge 10:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AWB and the plugin seems like the only way to actually do colossal tasks like this. If you try AWB, the trick is start up AWB while keeping at least one normal browser window open. Use the normal browser to go through all branches of Category:Norway systematically one at a time. Systematics is the key. Everytime you find a new sub category, use copy-paste on its name and ask AWB to build a list of the category's content. It will simply add these to any already existing list, so this allows you to create a monster-size list of articles. I tried dividing the HV material into two lists, but as I was going through the second, I suddenly realised that more than 80% of it was duplicates from the first, so that experiment was a complete failure. I'm not going to try that one again :) If the Norwegian category tree has as many branches as the Danish one, the process creating the list will probably take around 2 hours or perhaps a little more. Remember also to include the category Category:Norway stubs and its children. More than 80-90% of the stub material will be included already, but it will be a giant waste of time to forget the stub material the first time. AWB can sort out duplicates, so this way you don't have to work on the same material twice. Once you've compiled a full list, save it to a text file. Now, right click the article list in AWB and select that all duplicates be removed and that all non-article pages be removed. The new list should now be several hundreds of entries shorter than the first and consist only of articles without any duplicates. Next: right-click the list again and convert everything to talk pages. The list is now only composed of entries beginning with "Talk:..." Remember to save the new list to a text file and you're half way home. Setting up the plugin can be a little tricky but Kingboyd has made a good how-to guide. If you have any problems there, you know where to find me :) Cheers. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 21:47, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just remembered something important. Remember to go to your Wikipedia preferences and remove the "add pages I create to my watchlist". Close the Wikipedia session and close AWB if it is open. THEN open both again and begin the list. Otherwise you will end up with a watchlist of thousands of pages simply because you've added the project banner! Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 22:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! I have applied for permission to use AWB so I guess I'll just have to wait for it to go through. Inge 22:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Unfortunately, the application process has become a bit slower lately, perhaps it has to do with Bluemoose leaving the project? Just follow Kingboyd's guide, see User:Kingbotk/Plugin, and you'll be fine. The most important bit in setting up the plugin is remembering to deselect all the things that AWB normally does, so it doesn't begin "cleaning up" talk pages. The guide covers it rather thoroughly. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 22:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<-Btw, I presume that it is on purpose that the Norway banner doesn't have an "importance" rating. If it isn't, that should be fixed first. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 22:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did not want to include importance ratings at this point. The project has lately had a low level of contribution so I felt it might be too much of a challenge to implement both things right away. Personally I also have a slightly negative view of the importance rating as it might discourage writers working on off-core topics.

By the way: Do you know how to remove the spaces created below the project banner when others are placed below it? And how to make capitalisation of the rating not matter? Inge 10:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know how you feel about the importance ratings, but I figured that I might just as well add them for the Danish project right away. Both problems should be fixed now, although you still need to use the lowercase form "yes" when it comes to switching on the (something-I-can't-remember) needs attention flag. Cheers. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 22:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!

Delivered by grafikbot 10:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Norwegian television stubs

Hi Inge

I noticed that you've created a matching category for this template. WP:WSS normally only approves distinct categories for stub templates whenever we have 60+ articles in order to avoid a ton of small stub categories. If we don't have that many for Norwegian tv then I'm afraid, this category will have a somewhat short lifespan. I can only see around 10 articles in the Norwegian category, and all in all, the Nordic material is very small in this respect. I think it would be better to return this material to the general Category:Norway stubs category. Btw, isn't AWB a nice invention? Valentinian ^{T / C} 15:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I remember reading something like that somewhere now. I did it because the template didn't put the articles in any Norway-related category, only cat:European television stubs. My main objective when I discovered that was to collect all Norway-related templates (incl stubs) in Category:Template-Class Norway articles through the project banner.Inge 10:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging of Axe (deodorant) to WikiProject Norway

Hi Inge, I see you recently tagged the article Axe (deodorant) into the WikiProject Norway. Can I ask why? The article doesn't seem to have any relationship with Norway. Perhaps Axe deodorant is sold in Norway? I can't figure out why this was included. Thanks, Gwernol 13:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is in Category:Orkla Group. Orkla is a Norwegian company. (and yes it is sold in Norway). But I glansed through the article just now and couldn't find why it is in that category. Maybe Orkla has the Norwegian license or distribution? Inge 13:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Using bot to add WikiProject Norway tags

I noticed that you were using a bot to add WikiProject Norway tags to a (large) number of articles. We just tried that at WikiProject Spain, and had to stop because it went a little too broadly. I see that you got one question (above). How did you decide which categories to tag? Have you had more questions/challenges to this tagging project? EspanaViva 15:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you are over-tagging. Wikiproject templates should be added manually, to articles directly related to the project scope. Anything else is just reproducing category structure with fancy boilerplates. Please stop. I am blocking you for 5 minutes since you seem to be using a bot (please don't be offended, I am not chastising you, the block is intended to stop your bot in case you are letting it run unsupervised). Don't do that without using the "b" flag and declaring what it is doing. Do not tag the entire "Norse mythology" range as part of Wikiproject Norway, that's nonsense, we'd add up with all these articles tagged with five templates of Scandinavian templates. If you are interested in these subjects, I suggest you create Wikiprojects of more suited scope ("Wikiproject Norse mythology", or at least "Wikiproject Scandinavia") dab (𒁳) 15:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go ahead and delete talk pages like Talk:Alfrodull. Also note that you've added the Norway template to at least one article which already had it. [1] Personally I think even one instance of these is unjustified clutter, especially when it bluelinks an empty talk page. Haukur 16:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the double-tagging business. If you check your AWB settings, the first tab ("Set options") should only have ticks for "Auto tag" and "Skip article when no replacement made". "More options" should have no ticks at all. I'm pretty sure that should kill any double-tagging. Cheers. Valentinian ^{T / C} 17:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg har glæde i dit liv

Uden mig ville du ikke have mødt din bedste ven Valentinian. --194.255.124.250 16:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archives
1 2 3 4