User talk:Rudih

May 2013

thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia and your recent edit to Per Hüttner. i find the focus on permanence/impermanence a bit convoluted. could you please explain how you think and why this change of focus is so important? it is after all the first line of the article on huttner's work.Prallman (talk) 08:19, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Prallman, if you look at any writing by Hüttner you will find that the idea of impermanence permeates all his thought and expression. I chose the interview from the Inclusion, since it is current. The artist writes "He [Professor Rolf Luft] indicates the constant need for creativity and signals its movement along two interconnected edges/limits: tradition and invention. But most importantly, he emphasises that these edges/limits remain in constant flux themselves. Tradition and invention exist in continuous dialogue...". But I could equally have quoted his text from Repetitive Time (2006) where he writes about different kinds of impermanence and temporality. As a matter of fact it is difficult to find any published texts by the artist where these theme does not appear. I could even have quoted the foreword in Begrepp – En samling (1992) where he uses an ancient Buddhist text on impermanence to make parallels to quantum mechanics. (It is in fact in this publication where the text by Professor Luft comes from). It is true that Hüttner rarely uses the word "impermanence", he prefers to make a case against philosophical idealism. But it is the one topic that runs through his eclectic oeuvre and there is no better word to frame his practiceRudih (talk) 22:10, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2011

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Per Hüttner. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Kudpung (talk) 03:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I will do that. Rudih (talk) 13:17, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Tomas Nordmark

Hello, Rudih, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username North8000, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Tomas Nordmark, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomas Nordmark.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 20:57, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]