User talk:Haukurth/Archive11

Template:PD-EU-no author disclosure‎

Thank you-- excellent edit to Template:PD-EU-no author disclosure‎. I'm glad JoshuaZ unlocked it for now, and glad you came along. ... Kenosis 17:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC) ... Oh, I now see you're a sysop. Fantastic. ... Kenosis 17:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm all for this template and I expect to find images which I will want to upload under it. I just hope we can establish acceptable standards for its use. Haukur 17:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

"fan" translations

I inquired from another wiki admin w/ no luck so I thought I would aks someone's else: I'm sorry to complain like this and I have never really had to compain on wiki, but many Silent Hill fans are using a fan translation of a Official book only published in Japan for citations. The site is seen here where they get the translation from. Right now I am having problems w/ it on the Alessa Gillespie page, which uses a majority of sources are from this fan source. They also do not question the translation what so ever and are not citing the foreign-language original. If they cited the original, maybe I wouldn't have such a problem.

One user posted to justify this:"Unofficial translations or not, the material itself remains official. If the material contains important information on production/character conception, etc., it should be included. If we merely dismiss these translations as "unofficial," then we dismiss all information that comes originally from a language other than English; in that way, for example, we would also be dismissing the French interviews with Christophe Gans purely based on the fact that they were assessed by a third-party and translated into English, then placed as a reference within an article (translations are bound to not be 100% perfect, even when translated by creators of the series themselves due to the differences among languages, but judging a given translation by simply calling it "unofficial" and holding that against it breaks Wikipedia's neutral point of view). Furthermore, without production information, the article will never make it beyond B-class (eg. even w/ the references to the Translated Memories translations, the Silent Hill film page has gained GA+ status). The out-of-universe information is vital to separating fact from fiction in a fictional universe and in the context of writing an encylopedia article (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)). As WikiProject Video Game's featured articles (see Category:WikiProject Video games/Featured articles) demonstrate, framing points such as how the franchise has done internationally in terms of sales and the creation and development behind a character are all essential to making a good article."

But this is making me question wikipedia's reliability, as we are supposed to be an encyclopedia. Is this wrong? Or is there another way to solve this?

Xuchilbara 02:30, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand the issues. Non-English sources are certainly all right. When we want to quote a non-English text we look for a published translation. If there is no published translation we can translate ourselves but in those cases we should give the original text as well, perhaps in a footnote, so others can check the reliability of our translation. Haukur 12:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

European Union

RE Well, technically it's the European Economic Area. Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein also have to implement EU directives on copyright. Haukur 18:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC) :

Sure, I'm OK with whatever particular wording that is appropriate to describe the additional nations that've signed onto the EU directives. I understand Finland is hedging on it due to the free-speech/fair-dealing issues. Anyway, there are multiple wikiipedians involved-- whatever is chosen will, I hope, turn out to reasonably express it so it's both simple and accurate. .... Kenosis 18:20, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Iceland

That's nice and all. Now you can go read what I posted on his page, because it applies to you as well. Charles 19:30, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Haukurth, the relevant discussion in on Talk:Pretender, but this is turning into a perpetuum mobile. Valentinian ^{T / C} 08:22, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Controlled Demolition

Sorry, I made an effort to add a comment in reverting the anon, and I accidentally deleted your edit, as well. I probably should have just used the rollback button. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 12:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem - happens all the time. Haukur 12:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

reagan

Hi Haukurth, nice to meet you. As I said, I agree with your statements.. but I've made major improvements (in my opinion! :-) ) to the disarray of the econ section, plus Sandy and I removed several of the offending bits of trivia at the end of the article. Aside from your comments about the images, are you feeling more likely to Support? Thanks! Ling.Nut 19:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I guess it was more involved than fixing one sentence, huh? Much better now, and thanks for raising the issue! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:53, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you both for your improvements :) Haukur 20:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/House of Munsö

thought you might be interested Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Jenny Nyström

Hi Haukur, and thanks for your message. The picture was published in a book in 1895[1], and so it should be pd just like the pictures by Jenny Nyström in Sanders Edda.--Berig 19:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Great! There's no problem, then. Did you scan it in from that book or did you get it from somewhere else? Haukur 19:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, Haukur :).--Berig 18:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Wilhelmstrasse

Shall I start finding English quotations for this common usage? Or will you concede that this is well-known? Or have I been mistaken in believing you capable of treating naming disputes in good faith? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:53, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that in the context of English sources discussing this street the spelling you advocate isn't used more often than not. What I mean is that there is no "commonly used English name" in the sense I read Use English which gives examples such as Venice and Christopher Columbus, names the average person is familiar with. This is the way I've interpreted UE for a long time - thus I don't argue for moving Thor to Þórr because the average person is familiar with Thor but for more obscure characters I favor avoiding anglicizations.

You have a perfectly reasonable argument for wanting the move, even if I think the argument for not doing it is stronger. Haukur 22:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Please read the examples I cite; the Wilhelmstrasse may be somewhat more obscure than Christopher Columbus to the man in the street; but so are almost all our articles. And if the terrain is against me, it is because of dishonest German nationalists; please don't litter it with specious arguments. Wilhelmstrasse is no threat to Þ, really it isn't. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think dishonesty has anything to do with it and I wouldn't exactly call it nationalism either, though that's a bit closer. Yes, almost all our articles are more obscure than Christopher Columbus and consistently with that I do think that most of them don't need anglicization. I think you've marshalled a well-researched and reasonable argument for your preferred form. It's quite possible that you'll convince enough people to effect a move and if you do I'll congratulate you. I still honestly feel the other argument is stronger. Haukur 22:33, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I thank you for responding like a reasonable man, and invite you to look at pschemp's arguments in Talk:Voßstraße, where he consistently misstates the evidence. We have nationalists of all flavors on Wikipedia; and they share, even when bitter enemies, an infinite collective self-pity and a willingness to do anything for the Sacred National Cause. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:39, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea what political ideologies pschemp adheres to. I do think he was mean to Elonka for no reason on that talk page. I'm not sure what in particular you want to draw my attention to (it's a long discussion!). He seems to have a similar interpretation of WP:UE as I do. Unschool argues that it's a tortured literal reading that goes against the original intent of the policy. I think that view is not entirely without merit but it ignores the fact that the WP:UE wording has stayed consistent for so long - I think precisely because it allows some flexibility in interpretation. Haukur 22:49, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

If you're referring to your request to move the page back pending the result of the discussion I think that was a reasonable procedural suggestion and that pschemp's opposition to it was not entirely convincing. Haukur 22:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

No; to his treatment of the google evidence. Www.google.com gave 81,000 hits for both spellings (the same 81,000 hits, just like Wilhelmstrasse; google doesn't distinguish). Scholar.google.com gave 200 hits for both spellings, again the same 200 hits. Both sets are mixed bags; I think it possible to analyze the 200 Google Scholar hits and see predominance. (I would not be charging intellectual dishonesty if someone disagreed with me, however.) Pschemp interpreted this evidence as 81,000 for Voßstraße and 200 for Vossstrasse, despite being corrected several times. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

He does seem to have misunderstood the number at least at one point but I'm really not inclined to spend a lot of time on a meta-analysis of one editor's comments in a discussion some weeks ago. Haukur 23:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't ask you to; but this is what I meant by dishonesty. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

All right, I see what you mean. Personally I hold to Napoleon's (commonly known name, hence not "Napoléon") idea about assuming stupidity (or just plain old misunderstanding) rather than malice. Haukur 00:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ronald Reagan FAC

Hi there. The picture problem has been fixed, and the not-correctly liscensed photo was removed and replaced with a correctly lisenced photo. Would you consider striking your opposition here? Thanks for your help with the article! Best, Happyme22 03:05, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Kindness?

You are a kind person? I single-handedly rewrote the article of Freyja and corrected numerous things in Norse Mythology articles. Please gimme one or two barnstars for my contribution =| 222.252.229.140 07:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bjorn Gunnlaugsson.jpg

Thanks a lot! Remains the question of when the engraver (named H. C. Olsen) died, and what historic copyright terms Iceland had, and whether or not the extension to 70 years had any effect on works already PD. See e.g. Copyright law of Switzerland: 50 years until 1993, then non-retroactive extension to 70 years → works of authors who died 1942 or earlier are PD in Switzerland. I wouldn't be surprised if something similar had happened in Iceland. Lupo 08:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The extension to 70 years was definitely retroactive so if the engraver died in 1938 or later the engraving could still be under copyright. It's certainly possible that he lived 55 more years after making the engraving, though the odds would be rather against it. Perhaps the PD-Old tag was a bit too cavalier, an engraving made from a drawing/painting may very well qualify as a new artwork under article 5. Compare an earlier comment of mine.[2] Haukur 09:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes of course, engravings of a painting and the like are derivative works. There was even a case in the U.S. that explicitly held that the choice of how to prepare the engraving/etching (translation of colors and shades into specific line or dot patterns for brighter or darker regions) was artistic in its own right and gives rise to a new copyright on the engraving. Unfortunately, I cannot find the reference right now. Well, we'll leave it here at en-WP until we find out who this H.C. Olsen was. (Though the chances for that are probably minuscule, with such a common name!) Lupo 09:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Also applies to lithography and photolithography. See Circular 14. Lupo 09:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and could you please explain to me what (if any) the connection between Gunnlaugsson and Jens Sigurðsson is? (Other than that he also taught at the same school.) I can't make sense of this genealogy. Lupo 08:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Jens Sigurðsson's wife, Ólöf Björnsdóttir, was the daughter of Björn Gunnlaugsson and Ragnheiður Bjarnadóttir. Haukur 09:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Lupo 09:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Good link to Menntaskólinn í Reykjavík. But what is "Lærði skólinn" (Schola Docta)?? The translation I've seen is "Learned School" (in the Bjarnadóttir reference at BG). And there are even two redirects to it using "learned school". Lupo 13:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Lærði skólinn is the same thing and it does mean "learned school". 13:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

There's something wrong with the list of rectors. 1851 - 1867 goes to a person born in 1920: Bjarni Jónsson. And how come that [3] uses the same image (albeit smaller) as we do? Lupo 13:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Bjarni is a common name and Jón is a very common name so it's not surprising. Nor are the copyvio images in the article. As we know the status of our "free" image archive is poor indeed while people spend most of the time fighting over the minutiae of the fair use policies. Haukur 14:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, archive.org says the image appeared at their site somewhen between February and December 2006. It was uploaded here in September 2006, so it's quite possible that they copied from us. Or that the uploader was a student or teacher at that school. According to the uploader's first attempt, the picture was taken on Aug 2, 2005. I also have found only small versions of the image at the school website. Lupo 14:17, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

All right, fair enough. Haukur 14:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

It's my old school, by the way. Here I am outside it, embracing the girl who is now my wife: [4] Sneaky photographers! Haukur 14:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Really? I didn't know there were Paparazzi in Iceland! :-) Lupo 15:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Still got problems. Benedikz writes that BG became in 1851 "chief assistant (Yfirkennari)"—to the rector, I suppose. Kaalund, however, writes "Overlærer", which I had translated as "headmaster". (In German, Oberlehrer.) So what precisely is an Yfirkennari? Lupo 15:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Yfirkennari and Overlærer are Icelandic and Danish words for the same thing. I suppose Oberlehrer would be a literal translation of the word but it may not have the same connotations. I should think "head teacher" but I don't know. This title was not used in my day - we had 'rektor' (headmaster) and 'konrektor' (his second in command). Haukur 15:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Judging from these examples[5] I'd say 'yfirkennari' was the second most prestigious position, after 'rektor'. Haukur 15:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

"að Sveinbjörn yrði rektor, H. Scheving yfirkennari B. Gunnlaugsson fyrsti undirkennari."

So, at some point Sveinbjörn Egilsson was the rector, Hallgrímur Scheving was the "over-teacher" and Björn Gunnlaugsson was the "first under-teacher". Haukur 16:04, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, name changes made. Also added a couple more publications under "Further reading" (two from the 1990s, in Icelandic). I didn't add the link to Björn's error correction note to the external links as I couldn't figure out where it had appeared. Would you do it? Anyway, please do edit the article when you discover new stuff or want to fix errors or change naming conventions or whatever. You telling me and I doing it is an awkward way to proceed. Ok? Lupo 20:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The 1990s stuff look really interesting. I think I'll try to look them up and see if he did indeed meet Gauss. Oh, and sorry for making you do all the work - I'll try to be a less lazy collaborator ;) Haukur 20:32, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, since we've by now moved to Icelandic sources only that I couldn't read even if I somehow managed to get them, I fear I cannot help much more with this article. Re "stoneprinted": what's that supposed to mean? A stone relief on some house somewhere, maybe a university building, or the place where he lived 1817-22? Oh, and BTW, I have implicitly assumed that you did already have Benedikz' paper. If not, I could e-mail it. Lupo 20:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, you've shown quite some resilience in gleaning information from sources you can't read :) I don't know what "steinprentuð" means, presumably they mean that some sort of engraving was made. I don't have the paper and I would be happy to have it! Haukur 20:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah, it means "lithograph". Live and learn. Haukur 20:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

You've Got Mail. (SCNR) I can understand a word here or there (after all, it's a Germanic language), but that's it. About the same as with Danish. I just have to try to speak it out loud, then suddenly I can detect enough similarities to make educated guesses. It's not really "reading". And to know the context helps, too. Lupo 21:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

BTW, the obituary is signed "P.M." Could that be Páll Melsteð? Lupo 21:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

That was my guess as well. I strongly suspect so. Haukur 21:32, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

"Lithograph"... lithographed in Copenhagen! And "Olsen" is a Danish name, I think, not particularly Icelandic. If so, the image is not an engraving but a lithograph, and we'd know that this precise image had already been published before 1876. It's getting more and more unlikely that this Olsen died less than 70 years ago... Lupo 21:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Here's another lithograph of an engraving by H.C. Olsen. I've sent them an e-mail asking for details on the man. Lupo 07:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

P.S.: In retrospect, it's kind of obvious that "steinprentuð" means "lithographed". In Danish, "lithography" is "litografi" or, ta-daa, "stentryk". In German, the literal translation of "Lithografie" would be "Steindruck"... ("drucken" = "to print"). Lupo 07:23, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Say, did you get the e-mail with Benedikz paper? Lupo 06:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Woo-hoo! Got him! (On my own...) "H. C. Olsen" is Hans Christian Olsen, 1845 – 1909.[6][7] Yeah! Lupo 09:12, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, that's amazing! :D I'm very busy today (or at least for the next few hours) but I may be able to work on the article during the weekend. I did get the BB-paper, thank you! Haukur 09:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

A howto

Psst! New. -- Hoary 10:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your response

Thank you for stating your opinion in the Russians talk page. I really needed a different opinion from mine, because the more ideas there will be, the more alive and the discussion will be. Maybe it will be long and, well, one of those that make you made but the final concensus might be somthing that will stay for a long time. The current image is a concensus-reached one, but i thought, why not expanding? It's not like we remove someone from there. So again, thank you! M.V.E.i. 18:04, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:12_houses_of_heaven.jpg

What house type was used in making that chart? How did they calculate Mercury as being 2 signs from the Sun? IdLoveOne 18:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea! Haukur 19:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Grímur Thomsen

From this site: http://www.althingi.is/altext/thingm/1505200008.html -- Ciacchi 14:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Páll Melsteð

Noteable enough for WP? His sister? Lupo 14:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think he's quite notable. Here's an 1892 biography with a picture: [8] Sunnanfari says that the picture was taken ("tekin", implying a photograph) in 1886 but doesn't name the photographer or mention who converted the photograph to a printable material. There's a tiny squiggle in the lower left corner but it doesn't tell me anything. Haukur 14:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Þóra was Páll's second wife. She is certainly notable as well, possibly more so. Haukur 14:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Hans Peter Hansen... Lupo 19:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I would say the image in Illustreret Tidende is by Johann Georg Leander Pauli (1838 - 1928). See [9], and then [10] and [11]. Cheers, Lupo 11:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

But what does "R. af Db." mean? "Ridder af Dannebrog"? If so, when and why did he get that? Lupo 06:58, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it has to be Ridder af Dannebrog. Sunnanfari says he got a "riddarakross" in 1892, that has to be it. They don't really specify for what he got it. Haukur 08:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, got it from Ill. Tid.: [12][13] But they don't really say what for he got it, either. Lupo 09:11, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Question: Pauli's woodcut is certainly based on some pre-existing other work, in this case probably a photo. Do we/should we care about that? Lupo 06:58, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I've been wondering the same thing. It also goes for other images. Take Image:Sveinbjörn Sveinbjörnsson.jpg. Did Hansen really personally see Sveinbjörn when the xylograph was made or was there an intermediary sketch or photograph? I don't know, my source doesn't say anything about the picture. Sometimes our information is quite complete, like in Image:Sigurdur breidfjord.jpg, but more often it is not. Yet the likelyhood that pictures like this are in the public domain seems overwhelming. Even if an author of an underlying work lived to 1938 there would still be the possibility that this was an anonymous work or that the underlying photograph was a 'simple photograph' or that there was an understanding that the rights to the photograph transferred to the xylographer. Then, of course, someone now living would actually have to be able to present proof of the provenance of the picture and of their ownership of the copyright. How big a fudge factor can we accept and how can we contain it? I think the fudge factor of a typical PD image around here is certainly too big. Many people go: "Oh, this is old - I'll put PD-Old on it". Take Image:SveinbjornSveinbjornsson.jpg. Haukur 08:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm interested in your opinion

Please see the messege with the blue background i wrote here. I would like to hear your opinion about it :-) It would be best if you could state your opinion there, but if you want you could write it here, whatever comfortable for you. M.V.E.i. 15:05, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Nationality discussion continues

As a compromise i wrote to Andropov Soviet in the nationality (though i still claim nationality is an ethnic group). Nevertheless, out of interest i would like to continue the discussion on the talk page. The case itself is closed, but if you want you can continue to take part in the discussion here just out of interest, sort of a free stage. M.V.E.i. 20:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

BG on Google

Seems to be improving slowly. For +"björn gunnlaugsson", en-WP is #2. (Yes, Google already has a 47k version of the en-WP article.) If I do the same from my localized Google version, de-WP is #2 (despite being stubby), and en-WP #13. For +"bjorn gunnlaugsson", en-WP is #9, also at my local Google. (So the mention of that spelling in the footnote actually did have an effect...) I wonder when one of our articles will be #1, displacing that wrong summary giving "May 25" as his birthday (in all searches, moreover!). Lupo 11:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for checking in at Freedom of panorama

Thanks, we need more international help there. Please note, though, that thus far the primary resource for that article is David Seiler's two pieces at www.fotorecht.de. It would be nice to broaden the sources beyond that of one German attorney and a number of other cites that do not mention "panorama" or the German legislation. As an admin/sysop, you will recognize this as OR. But, as of today, we have some sources other than the Commons at least, so that's a start. Thanks again. ... Kenosis 19:54, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't really have a problem with the article. It's certainly a common enough concept. It's true, though, that it doesn't seem to have a well-established name and that's a bit annoying. I'd be okay with a move to Panoramafreiheit. Haukur 20:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

ARRGHH HELP MEEE!!!

I used to argue with you on Gullveig's talk page, but I think you are a good person. This guy acused me as a vandal for no reason, and as I ask him who what reason he labeled my edits as "vandalism", he deleted my comments to cover it up. I think he's gonna eat me alive! \(x_X)/;

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAllstarecho&diff=160670744&oldid=160670304

umm... can you create an account for me, dear admin? I like the name "YourMom", but they say you'll need to ask an admin to create an username like that (^_^)'

222.252.230.6 11:26, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm kind of taking a break from Wikipedia. Haukur 17:13, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Norwegian

So Norwegian is different from Old Norse because it's Danicized?70.74.35.53 07:38, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

No. Norwegian is different from Old Norse because their central government's language policies for at least the past 20 years has been decidedly schizophrenic. 216.69.219.3 07:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Danish influence isn't the whole story but it's certainly a big part of it. And, yes, language policy in Norway is a delicate subject. Haukur 07:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Your cleanup tag

Could you explain what in the Skúli Þórsteinsson article you believe requires cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards? Haukur 18:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Are some quotes from those books really all the information that we have on this guy? There isn't enough available information that we can draft an article that follows the standard, wikified biography, even briefly, with an intro, background, early life, later life, and legacy sections? Is enough known about his life to add an infobox to the article like most other bios have? Are there any public domain artistic impressions of the guy? If the answer to all these questions is a negative, then please feel free to remove the cleanup tag. In fact, you can irregardless remove the cleanup tag if you want to. By adding cleanup tags to articles it adds the article to a "cleanup needed" list that will sometimes attract interested editors who will come along and improve what was otherwise a forgotten article. But, it seems in this case that this article has someone that is actively participating in its development. Please keep up the good work! Cla68 20:56, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

• Are some quotes from those books really all the information that we have on this guy?
  • Yes, pretty much, these primary sources are all there is. The only thing that really could be added is more information on scholarly analysis of the six fragments of poetry attributed to the person.
• There isn't enough available information that we can draft an article that follows the standard, wikified biography, even briefly, with an intro, background, early life, later life, and legacy sections?
  • Do you feel the biography is in some way non-standard or unwikified? Could you be specific? I'd say there's definitely not enough information for sections on early life, later life etc.
• Is enough known about his life to add an infobox to the article like most other bios have?
  • I never use infoboxes for people so I don't really know what would be considered required information for one. Probably not, I suppose.
• Are there any public domain artistic impressions of the guy?
  • I don't think there are any artistic impressions of him whatsoever.
• By adding cleanup tags to articles it adds the article to a "cleanup needed" list that will sometimes attract interested editors who will come along and improve what was otherwise a forgotten article.
  • Well, it helps if you give any information at all on what you feel is wrong with the article. Your edit summary was simply "cleanup tag" which gave me no hint. In this case it seems that you felt the problem was that the article was too short or somehow non-standard. You've also rated the article on a quality scale. Your rating indicates that you think the article is "weak in many areas, and may lack a key element". Can you explain why you gave this rating? What areas do you feel it is weak in? What key element, if any, do you feel is missing?

I realize this article is not of much general interest. I wrote it mostly as a background article for Eiríkr Hákonarson and Battle of Svolder because the person in question was one of Eiríkr's court poets and one of the oldest historical sources on the Battle of Svolder. It could also be of interest to someone interested in Egill Skallagrímsson's descendants or in Old Norse poetry. But because very little is known about this 11th century person the article cannot possibly be long or divided into many sections or have a big infobox with a picture. Haukur 21:29, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Hope I'm not butting in here, but I took the liberty of removing the clean-up tag. And while I do not want to "attack" user Cla68 in any way, I feel, in general, that it seems to be somewhat to easy to resort tagging of articles in wikipedia at the moment. I also sometimes wonder what the value of these "ratings" is supposed to be, when articles are rated by people with no apparent prior knowledge of the subjects they assess. --Barend 22:11, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I was considering removing the tag as well. I don't think that it was Cla68's intent, but too often frequent tagging appears to be with the intent of trolling, and it is too easy to add tags on articles. I think every tag should be motivated with a post on the talkpage, a procedure which I believe would encourage actually editing the articles instead.--Berig 15:28, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, guys. Haukur 20:18, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

the standard, wikified biography [...] with an intro, background, early life, later life, and legacy sections? And let's not forget "Relationships" and "Controversy". Meanwhile, how about Skúli Þórsteinsson in popular culture: Does he run on PlayStation? -- Hoary 10:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Who were his influences? What edition of The Monster Manual mentions him? Which Anime series has he shown up in? Are there any "slash fiction" treatments of him and Egil in a whorehouse? (I have watched the poor Sylph grow more tails than a dog show. She is now more 'in popular messes' than article.) Geogre 01:35, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Tssss, you guys are nothing but a bunch of clueless academics! Can't you see that the man is missing all the standard info, such as Nickname(s), Species, Gender, Relatives and Address. For guidance, see for example Mahatma Ghandi, or, if you simply you can't come up with sufficient box info to make a proper article, at least make the page a redirect to pages by people who can, as has already been done for Odin. ;) Pia 02:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

PS. Haukurth, I admire your patience and cool, as always, but especially this week, with two such creative tagging sessions to deal with, while you were trying to take some time off. Hope your RL weekend is pleasant and relaxing enough to make up for it. Lots of people on tag alert for these articles now (and I'm not even counting the experts now). No worries - have fun. Best wishes, Pia 04:08, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

That's very perceptive of you. Yes, I was trying to take some time off and I got sucked back in by those two tagging episodes. You've all been great here, though. Thanks to everyone who's commented here for making me laugh :) Haukur 18:25, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Saell

Sæll og blessaður!

Ég heiti Sveinbjörn og er graduate nemi í Skotlandi sem stendur. Ég er viss um að þú þekkir mig gegnum editin mín sem Palthrow á Wikipedia. Ég bý í Bretlandi, hef búið í London um tíma, en bý sem stendur í Edinborg. Ef þú hefur áhuga á að skiptast á ímeil og símanumerum, upp á það að gera að hittast við tækifæri, láttu mig vita á netfangi sveinbjornt hjá simnet punktur is. -- Palthrow 02:34, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Bréf sent. Haukur 19:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

House of Munsö

Hi Haukur, I am still having the old dispute over the House of Munsö with user:Pieter Kuiper. He wants to remove stuff, while I want to keep in things that I find interesting. Please, join the discussion and give your opinion.--Berig 16:10, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

You seem to be holding your own for the time being and I don't really have much to add. I don't see anything wrong with the article, it clearly states which information is legendary and which is accepted as historical. Haukur 19:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: More on Gauss/Schumacher/Gunlögsen

Got Gerardy's book now. It just gives the conversation as reported by Schumacher, stating that this part belonged into letter #951. It's the only mention of Björn Gunnlaugsson, who in the index is mistakenly given as "Gunlögsen, Professor in Kopenhagen"! There are no missing pieces in letters #1081/82 (the "fish-cold hands" bit) concerning Björn. Lupo 15:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I was hoping there'd be some commentary, but alas! Thanks for getting it anyway. We may want to cite the page at some point. Haukur 18:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Legendary saga

Hello Haukurth! You seem to be the person to ask about all things Old Norse. I made a few edits to the article on legendary sagas, and have now suddenly become the "extreme saga skeptic", which makes an interesting change after the discussions with Pieter Kuiper. If you have the time and inclination, maybe you could take a look at the recent edits and discussion page there, and see what you think. Skeptically yours, BarendBarend 16:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, Barend twice demanded that WP needed citations for the fact that the last section of Hervarar saga is used as a source in Swedish historiography. I don't see any reason for doing so but assumption of bad faith on his part or extreme saga scepticism. Since I take for granted that Barent follows Wikipedia policy and assumes good faith, only the last option remains.--Berig 17:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I am certain that Barend acts in good faith, I have seen nothing but good from him. If we characterize Pieter Kuiper's views as extreme saga skepticism then I think Barend's views are clearly not, as reflected in recent discussions. I don't personally have much of an idea on how much Hervarar saga is used as a source in Swedish historiography and I don't have any handy sources on the matter. I'm sorry I can't be of more help. Haukur 17:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Haukurth, I stated to Barend concerning Hervarar saga that it is frequently used in Swedish history books as a historic source[14]. It is such a common fact that it should not need a reference. Barend clearly did not believe in me and wrote "if it is so easy to provide a reference, I think you should do it". I am used to being treated as a reliable editor on WP and the only person who I have ever met before who has shown me that kind of bad faith is the extreme saga scepticist Pieter Kuiper.--Berig 17:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think he meant that he didn't personally believe you. I think he meant that he thought this was a statement that readers would be likely to question so giving them a reference would be useful. Of course we remember the good old days when we didn't bother with a truckload of footnotes in each article, but, alas... Haukur 17:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, there is no changing the fact that Barend treated me like an unreliable editor[15]. I believe that you would be insulted too, Haukur.--Berig 17:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Apologies to Haukur for using his talk page for, basically, a direct reply to Berig, but since the rest of the context is here, I thought I'd reply here. It was certainly never my intention to insult anyone. But I see no reason why Berig should be insulted. The statement that Hervarar saga is used as a source for Swedish history contradicts everything I've read about the legendary sagas. I was therefore curious to know the source, and I assume other readers would be as well. I was very surprised when Berig simply brushed aside the need for a citation without further ado, and I am glad he later added sources. If everyone should get insulted every time someone asked someone for a citation, then we would have a real problem. You can't interpret requests for sources for what you write as an accusation that you are an unreliable editor. Furthermore, I do believe we have a real disagreement about the content of the article, but I'll discuss that further on the articles discussion page.Barend 12:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

It is true that there are wikipedians who demand references for facts that you would never see referenced in academic works. When you ask for references for facts that many other people take for granted you have to accept that people question your motives. Personally, I prefer to do the necessary research rather than slap {{fact}} tags on articles.--Berig 13:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Defaultsorting Saddam Hussein article

I have asked a question on the Saddam Hussein article about your recent edit with regards to the defaultsort. I'd like you to comment on my question, please. Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 07:47, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Patronymics

Hi Haukur, the Swedish tradition of using patronymics is not entirely dead yet, and every once in a while you meet women called X Y-dotter. Two of my uncles, born in the 1940s, are named Eskilsson because their father had Eskil as his first name. There is even a rising use of matronymics in Sweden, e.g. Karinsdotter and Annasdotter. However, even though the tradition is still alive, it is rare, and I don't know of any notable women having patronymics beside Ida Ingemarsdotter. As for whether to list by first name or last name, I checked Nationalencyklopedin and it listed Karin Hansdotter by her first name and not by patronymic. I believe it should be correct to list by first name for pre-20th century people and by patronymic for post-19th century people.--Berig 16:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Skåne lockbow

Skane Lockbow at Hjorungasvagr - see http/www.thebeckoning/medieval/crossbow/chronology or Google "crossbow chronology"Streona 22:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I just can't find anything on this in the primary sources on this battle. Haukur 22:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

You are right- I cannot find (for now) anything in the primary sources for the battle, although there are references to arrows in the Heimskringla and Olaf Tryggvasson's Saga. My point is that Eadric Streona could have had knowledge of the lockbow from Thorkell the Tall in 1014, even if the first reference is in 1066.I see Eadric as a kind of 11th century James Bond figure as King Ethelred's secret agent , arranging assassinations and defections - principally of Thorkel the Tall. If we accept that Eadric's father was in fact Aethelweard the Historian, then he would likely have been involved in diplomatic missions with him and Bishop Alfheah. When Alfheah is then held hostage at Greenwich, Eadric Streona attempts to arrange payment, but Alfheah is killed by Thorkell's men, upon which Thorkell comes over to Ethelred, and he and Eadric are then on the same side(s) until Eadric's death. The use of a booby trapped toilet is thus in keeping- now all we need is an Anglo-Saxon "Q".

However, I did check my Sir George Dasent version of Burnt Njal's Saga, which is of roughly contemporary events in Iceland, and a passage which has always intrigued me. Gunnar is besieged by numerous attackers in his hall and in one attack his bow string is cut. He says to his wife, Hallgerda, "Give me two locks of thy hair, and ye two, my mother and thou, twist them together into a bow string for me". I have found this difficult to believe since a longbow would have required a string the height of the bowman - and presumably Gunnar was a big lad. Shortbows fired from the chest are less well documented but even so the length involved seems excessive. However the bow of a crossbow or lockbow is very much shorter. What do you think ? Streona 13:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Eritrean sorting

Do you feel Eritrean people should be sorted by first name, like Icelandic people? See Category:Icelandic people. Haukur 00:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I do. --04:44, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hrafnkatla.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hrafnkatla.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, clearly this text-only book-cover from 1940 which was used in an article which had a whole section of commentary about the book is the epitome of fair use evilness. We are lucky to have such a vigilant Wikipedian as Danny to take care of such GFU (whatever the frak that means) images and to have such an excellent, polite and thoughtful bot as yourself to follow things through. Haukur 18:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Help with "Diddú"

Hi, if you've got time I could do with some help with the article I created on Icelandic soprano Diddú (Sigrún Hjálmtýsdóttir):

• Providing an IPA pronunciation for "Diddú" and "Sigrún Hjálmtýsdóttir".
• Updating the information in the article: biographical data, discography, etc. (there seem to be very few English sources).
• Providing English translations for the titles of albums released by Diddú.
• Checking that diacriticals have not been left out of Icelandic words and names.

Thanks! — Cheers, JackLee ^{–talk • contribs • count–} 02:47, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I made some attempt to address points 1, 3 and 4 above. Haukur might come along at some point and check it. (A small point, "Óskastund" literally means a moment when you can make a wish and it will come through but my feeling is that people use it more freely now so I thought "A Magical Moment" was a decent free translation. Improvements are of course welcome.) Stefán 17:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Stefan, thanks very much for your help. I've taken the liberty of reposting your comment and my response at "Talk:Diddú" — Cheers, JackLee ^{–talk • contribs • count–} 17:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Sorting of Indonesian names

There are currently no policy/guideline regarding the way to sort Indonesian names (and names in general) in the Indonesian Wikipedia. Most of the time we follow the :en by using surnames first, however this is not easy to enforce since many Indonesian don't have surnames. Usually in Indonesian publications, (eg. the Indonesian White Pages) the "first name, followed by surname" style is used. Hayabusa future 11:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Hayabusa future. This comment doesn't relate exactly to your query, but you might be interested to know that I've created two surname disambiguation templates, {{Malay name}} and {{Malay name2}} that you might find useful to use. — Cheers, JackLee ^{–talk • contribs • count–} 15:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Help with new article "Paul Oscar"

Hi, after you created a red link to "Páll Óskar Hjálmtýsson" in the article "Diddú" I did a little bit of digging and ended up creating a new article on him called "Paul Oscar". He's had a more colourful life than his older sister! If you're free, do help improve certain aspects of the article: see "Talk:Paul Oscar#Help with new article "Paul Oscar"" — Cheers, JackLee ^{–talk • contribs • count–} 03:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of image

Hi Haukurth, I thought I had found a rare PD image of a lost runestone, but when I had uploaded it, I discovered that it is not an image of the stone it purports to be. In any case, the image is misnamed, so could you please be kind and just delete Image:U 217, Vallentuna.jpg?--Berig 20:53, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Done! Haukur 20:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!--Berig 20:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Icelandic exonyms

Hi Haukur; I recently stumbled upon the article Icelandic exonyms and removed two city names that certainly aren't Icelandic exonyms (Genf and Freiburg - those are simply the German names of these cities in use in Switzerland, and even if the Icelanders use them, they don't get Icelandic because of this). I didn't have a closer look at the other exonyms then, but later noticed "Salernisborg" removed by you. As I'm trying to learn Icelandic (my native language is Swiss German), I think I even understand why you removed this - it means "toilet city", right? Given this, I grew more suspicious of the list. Are the other place names in the list really all exonyms well-known in Iceland or are there some just made up? For example, do the Icelanders really use "Boslaraborg" for the city of Basel in Switzerland, or did they in the past? Maybe you as a native speaker (I think) could distinguish those that are in use from the archaic ones and remove the completely made-up ones, if there are more of them? For example, you could mark the currently used exonyms with an asterisk or the like... Gestumblindi 03:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

You are right, Salernisborg means "toilet city". I gather it occurs once in one of the riddarasögur. That doesn't, in my opinion, justify including it in a list like this - at least not without some qualification. Now, most of the names in the list are exonyms in current use. We do normally call the capital of Denmark Kaupmannahöfn, we do call Venice Feneyjar etc. Some are used maybe half of the time - Kiev is sometimes but not always called Kænugarður and London is sometimes called Lundúnir. Some are only rarely used but are still common enough that most people are aware of them - New York is sometimes called Nýja Jórvík but usually in a "haha, what a funny exonym" kind of way. I've heard Frankafurða for Frankfurt but I don't think it sees any serious use. The less commonly mentioned places are harder for me to judge - I've never heard Rauðstokkur for Rostock but then I don't recall ever having occasion to discuss that city or read about it in an Icelandic text. Same with Stræla for Stralsund. Beats me. As for Boslaraborg that's one I haven't heard before. Google shows me that it occurs in Mirmants saga and there is one use of it on the web, apparently non-ironic but still in the context of discussing medieval travels. It's certainly not a well-known exonym. It would be nice to make this list more consistent but I don't know what would be the best sources. Well, I can use the most recent dictionary. I now see that it does have an entry for Boslaraborg and that it marks the word as obsolete. But what methodology should be used to construct a list like this? Haukur 09:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

The dictionary also has an entry for Salernisborg and also marks that one as obsolete. I guess I could restore it with a similar note. I also suppose I could go through the whole list with the dictionary and verify it. Haukur 09:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Going through the list with your dictionary and marking obsolete exonyms as such would seem to be a great idea to me, it would certainly improve the list. I only have Langenscheidt's often not very helpful German/Icelandic dictionary, not containing a lot of place names. Gestumblindi 16:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

All right, done. But I seem to have made a mistake in the syntax somewhere, some words seem out of place now. Can you spot what is wrong? Haukur 17:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Unfortunately, I'm not an expert on tables; I also had some problems when I removed entries, and can't spot now what is wrong at a first and second glance; maybe you know some table-guru? :-) Gestumblindi 17:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Þorgerður Egilsdóttir

Hello Haukur. Could you please have a look at this article and see if it's worth translating? Thank you. Best regards, Húsönd 03:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

It would have made a passable stub but unfortunately it seems to have been copied from another site so I deleted it. Note that this woman is the one referred to in Thorgerda. Haukur 09:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar! Everyking 22:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Image Replacement

Hello there,

...I don't know how to replace those images with free ones, but if it WILL (not only CAN) be done, then I'd like that to happen ASAP (before those current images can even be deleted). If they don't get replaced, then I'd like to keep the current copyrighted ones, if you will.

...Can you help sort this out, please? I can't find free versions online as that is almost impossible to do in this circumstance. Thanks, ~ Troy 19:56, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure there are a bunch of Wikipedians in Ontaria and I bet there are some in Mississauga too. Ask them to take pictures. You could start over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada. Haukur 20:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

1583 Norwegian Document

I'm trying to find the durrent dialect of Norwegian that closest to Middle Norwegian.129.128.67.23 (talk) 00:27, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

The dialects in Sogn og Fjordane are sometimes considered the most archaic. See Sognamål. Haukur (talk) 00:48, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Durova's RFC

I totally agree with you that Durova should be sanctioned for blocking !! and that it is cheap of this office and Jimbo to shut Giano up. However, I take great offense when you attempt to draw parallel between !!'s block and LionheartX's block without properly doing your homework. Please read my statement in the RfC to familiarize yourself with LionheartX's case (which I also copied to my talkpage) and retract your statement about Durova's abuse of power in the LionheartX's mess. Thank you--Certified.Gangsta (talk) 07:40, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for telling your side of the story. Haukur (talk) 09:17, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not really my side of the story. The policy violations are extremely obvious. We don't need Durova's sleuthing method to catch guys like him. If we tolerate sockpuppeteers like him, maybe we should reconsider arbCom's decision Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/PoolGuy and consider lifting the perma. block on User:PoolGuy and User:Thousandsons. That would be total chaos.--Certified.Gangsta (talk) 10:47, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

You've added your view to the RFC, I've added a note to my view encouraging people to read your view. I don't really know what more I should do. My impression was that Durova made a mistake in blocking the user, your view is that she made a mistake in unblocking him. Haukur (talk) 10:50, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Hildur Guðnadóttir

I see you changed the name sorting for Hildur Guðnadóttir. The usual (formal) reference to a person is by surname and is more appropriate for an encyclopedia, but perhaps things are done differently in Iceland? Totnesmartin (talk) 20:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

We sort Category:Icelandic people and its subcategories by name, rather than patronymic. You can use the patronymic as an ersatz surname for sorting other categories if you want. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Iceland-related articles) and Icelandic name for more detail. Note that this person is unusual in that she has both a matronymic and a patronymic (in that order). Haukur (talk) 21:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I've just seen your contribs, and it's obvious you are the expert when it comes to Icelandic! I'll leave the surname work for you. i only created the article after seeing her in a music magazine - I know nothing about Icelandic. Totnesmartin (talk) 22:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

You've written a fine article. I'm sorry I was a bit cranky. Haukur (talk) 22:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Cranky? I didn't see that. Perhaps you live in a politer society than I do! Totnesmartin (talk) 22:41, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

For kind words. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 21:52, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Four stags of Yggdrasill

Hey Haukurth! I wanted to thank you for your excellent work on the Four stags of Yggdrasill article. You've taken a small, poorly sourced article about an obscure subject and turned it into the most informative page about the subject on the internet. Thank you! :bloodofox: (talk) 04:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, that's kind of you to say. You should note, though, that I was the one who wrote the small poorly sourced article to begin with :) Haukur (talk) 10:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, someone has to lay the foundation and I don't mean to say there's anything wrong with that! Still, excellent job getting it up to par. :} :bloodofox: (talk) 19:56, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Reflist

There's also no consensus that it shouldn't. To refrain from including it in AWB edits would be impractical. If you think it's incorrect, you should address it with the programmer of AWB. Doczilla (talk) 08:34, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:"Avoid making insignificant or inconsequential edits such as only adding or removing some white space," I'll grant you that one. Doczilla (talk) 08:37, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

You won't be the only person to think that, I'm sure, so I will keep it in mind (even though I still say that anybody who cares enough to complain about that particular change should voice the complaint an AWB programmer). When AWB pings an article for nothing but that, it is appropriate for me to look for anything else worth editing instead of just clicking Save, though. I really don't care about the reflist format myself. I just feel it will help others if I do what I can to keep AWB from stopping at an article every time any uses AWB for a group that includes that article. Fair enough? Doczilla (talk) 09:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles on Norse mythology

Hello! As you have written some good articles on Norse mythology, I would be interested to hear your view on the recent articles by user:Haldrik on Norse cosmology and Norse dwarves. I'm not extremely well versed in mythology, but I have the distinct feeling that some of his edits are basically original research, especially since he doesn't quote any sources, and uses his own translations of Norse poetry. This strikes me as quite risky, especially since he doesn't appear to be an expert in Old Norse language, (as seen here.) Do the new articles look ok to you? --Barend (talk) 10:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Eg er einig med deg i at mye av det som han skriv ser ut til å vera hans eigen meiningar. Sume av desse er røynleg ikkje så toskete men det er rett at regelen her på W er at me skal bruka trauste heimlar. Kanskje kan eg hjelpa. Haukur 20:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright question

If an image appeared in an article in 1911 (so it is before 1923) then is it O.K. to use it? The source is the New York Times: Penitentiary farm pays and makes money, although it is also used on another more recent webpage: Introduction to Civil Rights Litigation Thanks! Mattisse 19:50, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Anything published in the United States before 1923 is definitely in the public domain in the United States. You can use Template:PD-US. Haukur 19:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Mattisse 20:12, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Kvinneby amulet

Hey Haukurth, I am interested in adding the Kvinneby amulet article to Thor#Archaeological_record as I think it's appropriate and it would get it some more traffic and recognition. However, to do this, I need to know when it was made. Any idea? I can't seem to find any sources on the dating of this obscure object. :bloodofox: 07:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I never really finished that article :$ It's thought to date from the 11th century unless I'm much mistaken. Haukur 07:46, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I've added to your workload then, as I've since added a brief summary and a link at Thor#Kvinneby_amulet. :) I didn't include the date since we don't have a source but I placed it where I'd have put it if we did, hint-hint! Also, where can we get a free picture of this thing? Or a picture at all? I'm curious. :bloodofox: (talk) 09:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)