User talk:Tomas e

• /Archive 2007
• /Archive 2008
• /Archive 2009
• /Archive 2010
• /Archive 2011-2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Mongol naval power Op-ed: Crisco 1492 on war films

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Freedom of choice is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Freedom of choice until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

SPECIFICO talk 19:13, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A few months ago, you participated in a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Did you know about Gibraltar-related DYKs on the Main Page. I am proposing that the temporary restrictions on such DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012, should be lifted and have set out a case for doing so at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs. If you have a view on this, please comment at that page. Prioryman (talk) 22:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at US Army leadership since World War II

Thank you for the good advise. I will try to improve the internal links when creating entries on Swedish subjects to make the articles more stable. The problem is that I have a difficult laptop to work with when writing (i.e. an important button on the tablet is broken). Thats why I work a bit slow sometimes. PS: I speak Swedish too. --AddyFBG (talk) 17:56, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Can you please remove the stub-tag from that article? I will certainly not try to expand it because the idea behind "political party funding" was to provide links to a wealth of articles that pertain to the subject.Khnassmacher (talk) 13:03, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I replied at User talk:Khnassmacher#Stub markings and comments in article text since I had some hints that may better belong on your talk page. Tomas e (talk) 13:27, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tomas! Can you provide me with a list of featured articles on Swedish Wikipedia (must be about Swedish subjects) which I can translate to English and upload here. I appreciate your help. Best regards --AddyFBG (talk) 14:55, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See sv:Wikipedia:Utmärkta artiklar, sv:Wikipedia:Bra artiklar and sv:Wikipedia:Rekommenderade artiklar for a falling scale of "featured" articles on Swedish Wikipedia. If you are going to translate I assume that you're able to navigate through Swedish pages. :-) The first two categories have gone through a review process, but not the last one. Good luck! 15:00, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at refugees during the Battle of France Interview: Editors discuss writing articles about the former Yugoslavia Op-ed: Prioryman on German V-weapon sites and the historian's responsibility

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Lion's Share (band) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Therion, DIO and 220 Volt

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Sturmvogel 66 and Hawkeye7 look at aspects of the Pacific War Op-ed: ErrantX considers the rabbit hole of research

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Dumelow on the French Foreign Legion and Nick-D on New Zealand military history Op-ed: Nick-D on military history tourism

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tysta Mari, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coffee shop (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:48, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Works on the RNZAF, World War I in the Baltic, and British battleship construction Op-ed: Anchors Aweigh for the Majestic Titans

--BabbaQ (talk) 15:26, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Australia's frontier wars Interview: What Wikimedia chapters can offer military history editors

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Daniel Berg (evangelist) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Amazon

Gunnar Vingren (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Amazon

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Knut Wulff (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Franchise and Fortia

Gunnar Dafgård AB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Meatballs

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I won't argue with an expert on the protocols. I'll let it be since I didn't use the correct protocol on PRODS. I'll just let those articles, remain on wikipedia. I'll just forgot I'd ever tried to do that!Demrep. —Preceding undated comment added 22:09, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you just PROD articles that fulfil the criteria, it isn't that difficult, so I hope you didn't get the wrong impression. On another note, deleting my commenting and replying here is a bit of an odd talk page behaviour. Usually a discussion is kept together where it started. Regards, Tomas e (talk) 11:23, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I definitely got the wrong impression from you. It sounded like you were a know it all with that message and like you were dumbfounded or dismayed at what I tried to do. It may be odd behavior to you, but I rather not read that message again or see it on my user page again. Oh well, it's water under the bridge now and I'll get on with other edits and not attempt mass deletions of articles anymore. I learned something from all this, which is what counts in the end. Sincerely, Demrep —Preceding undated comment added 16:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the death of Osama bin Laden Op-ed: Sturmvogel_66 presents his secrets of prolific contribution

In expressing opinion at Wikipedia:BOTREQ#TedderBot_replacement. If enough people comment there, maybe something will finally happen. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:21, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill ^[talk] 17:53, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the American Civil War

I am not sure the right etiquette. I found the article on Bothnian Bay, which had correctly been rated a stub, and expanded it. In terms of size it went from 2,012 bytes to 21,389 bytes, so it is clearly no longer a stub. I don't think I should rate my own work, so I removed the assessment in the expectation that someone else would come by and re-rate it, as you did. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:01, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I did come by, but in many or most cases noone will come by, at least not in a reasonable timeframe. Assessing your own article is really only a problem at the Good Article or Featured Article level, where some sort of "peer review" is suitable to have. Assessing your own work as stub, start or C, depending on its length and level of referencing and illustration, is completely unproblematic. Now, removing a stub assessment is less problematic than removing them at higher levels, but as a principle I prefer to see updates rather than deletions. Your best guess is always better than nothing, if you feel certain that the current assessment is wrong. By the way, I noted that you have done several valuable additions to articles; keep up the good work! Best regards, Tomas e (talk) 14:17, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you find any material for expansion of Fäbodristning like 400ch more needed for DYK and then it will go directly to DYK as it forfills all the other requirements. I have put you in the nom for DYK for credits. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I was just assessing it after you placed the project tag; I don't really know anything about the subject or have any sources handy. Good luck! Tomas e (talk) 12:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks Austro-Hungarian battleships of World War I Op-ed: Advice on reviewing Featured and A-Class articles

This article is about a well known Irish family who, I accept, have passed down a title they may not have deserved. It is not an article about Swedish barons of which I know nothing. I cannot see how this title business affects the notability of the family members, who were leading members of Irish society, built country houses and were High Sheriffs of their county. Incidentally the naming convention is that of UK barons as the family members were Anglo-Irish and had no ongoing connections with Sweden.Plucas58 (talk) 22:16, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have nothing against an article on the De Robecks as a family (also serving as disambiguation page, if articles on several members), but the lead sentence indicated the article was on a non-existing Swedish title. I couldn't see anything to salvage under an article name which is not really correct (or at least not official), so I PRODded it. But I think there's a constructive middle ground to be had, by focussing the article on the Anglo-Irish family and not on the title. Here's my suggestion: move the article from Baron de Robeck to De Robeck and de-PROD it after it has been moved and modified. I suggest I'll create the article on the Fock family based upon sv:Fock (adelsätt) within the next few days, so there's something at the wikilink target. The "1st Baron" etctera should either be removed, or changed to "styled himself as...", if indeed that was the case for all of them. I'll go over the article after you've moved it, and make sure it doesn't make any claims about Swedish nobility that is unsupported by reliable Swedish sources. OK? Tomas e (talk) 10:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your suggestions on how to resolve our differences. But, just as you wish to defend the integrity of articles about the Swedish peerage I am also concerned that an article about a significant Irish family describes them as they are and not as you would wish them to be. They are the Fock family, but widely known and accepted as the Barons de Robeck. Whether they deserve the title is a subsidiary issue.

As you can see I had already changed the lead sentence to remove any suggestion that the title was legitimate. My counter proposal is that the title of the article be left as is because that is what people would expect it to be when searching (I only wrote the article because I was searching for them myself under their assumed title of Baron de Robeck), but that the text be modified as you suggest to "state clearly that they were a branch of the Swedish noble family Fock (noble family) who took the name de Robeck (unilaterally) after emigrating". I don't want to drag this out any more than you do but I don't think we have yet agreed on the best compromise.Plucas58 (talk) 12:03, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a continuation of the discussion should be held at the talk page of the article Talk:Baron de Robeck, in case more editors have anything to add. I appreciate your willingness to adapt the article, but I still believe that a De Robeck article, with Baron de Robeck as a redirect, would be a better solution. And I just like to point out that my aim is factual accuracy (backed up by WP:RS) and keeping the content (and article titles) on an encyclopedic level. Tomas e (talk) 16:19, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No need. Changes made as you requested. Need to move on.Plucas58 (talk) 22:42, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maria Magdalena Mathsdotter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lapland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:43, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Wine for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 12:29, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Hawkeye7 looks at US industry in World War II Op-ed: AustralianRupert offers a soldier's perspective on editing Wikipedia

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Carcharoth and Hawkeye7 look at World War I cemeteries and the British Army in World War II Interview: Less-represented areas of military history – part 2 Op-ed: TomStar81 and Nick-D look back on 2013 and ahead to 2014

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Trousseau (grape), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jura (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D, Zawed and Hawkeye7 look at recent releases

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Rabaul in World War II and Australia in World War I

Hi, when you find time for it please assess some of the Wikiproject Swedens articles. Over 100 unassessed and unknown importance Swedish articles right now and I know that you atleast in the past have shown interest in keeping those numbers down. Just a suggestion atleast :) regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 01:05, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've been busy with other things and haven't done any of this for the last couple of months, mostly due to a lack of time. I might come back to do this, but most likely not in the short term. Regards, Tomas e (talk) 10:30, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Hawkeye7 on military command and Nick-D on F-111s in combat

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Hawkeye7 looks at Britain's War Machine Interview: Article writers discuss German military history

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at The Lost Boys of Anzac Op-ed: Peacemaker67 on Featured Articles involving Yugoslavia in World War II

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at life aboard a US aircraft carrier and Hawkeye7 considers the role of food in World War II

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Jonas Vinther and Nick-D look at examples of electronic media Op-ed: TomStar81 on the shot heard around the world

Hello. It looks from the edit history like you re-added a 'notability' tag to this page in 2010. The thing is, the article is fully referenced. Yes, it is local, but all wineries are. Having a page on the history of specific wineries is not non-notable IMO. They can go for a lot at auctions (globally) for one; they are collected globally, like paintings or pottery; and they are also an important part of local cultures. I think this page should be expanded, but it is definitely notable. Moreover, I think most wineries at List of wineries and vineyards in Alabama should have their own page as well. It would be extremely problematic if they were deemed "non-notable," however.Zigzig20s (talk) 14:58, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I definitely disagree that all or most wineries are notable, in Alabama or elsewhere. Bordeaux has 8,000+ wine producers, and I suppose some 5% of these might be notable enough for Wikipedia articles in my opinion, and applying the basic guidelines. Please see the basic WP:Notability and WP:CORP guidelines, as well as WP:NOTDIRECTORY under WP:NOT (which also makes me think that exhaustive list of all wineries, including non-notable ones, is highly questionable Wikipedia content). And of course, this has been made more concrete in Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a wine guide. However, I must say that I can't exactly recall that specific edit from four years ago among my 61,479 edits (and that's just counting this language version...), but I do notice that this article has had a lot of non-encyclopedic, "wine guide style" material added. However, I'm not as active as I used to be, so if you're interested in an general discussion you could try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wine rather than here. Unfortunately, that project also isn't as active as it used to be. Tomas e (talk) 15:42, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Tomas, would you be willing to poke your head over at the Merlot Talk page. I'm afraid that NewTestLeeper is going to go on a POINTy deletion rampage through all of our wine articles. I'm failing in trying to convince him to be constructive and replace the images he doesn't like rather than just wholesale deletion. I have never had any objections to wine pics being replaced with vineyard pics but the current Merlot article is a mess with just walls of text and no illustrations. Even innocuous images like this with the wine bottle firmly in the background apparently aren't even safe. Another viewpoint would be welcomed. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:25, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Might do if I feel like I have the time, but it might better to get someone who understands the subject but has a fresh set of eyes. I detect a certain lack of WP:CIVILity in edit comments from the editor in question. It's fairly insulting to repeatedly claim that someone's edits are "advertising". Tomas e (talk) 17:41, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Drmies is definitely more reasonable and I suspect that even he wouldn't feel comfortable with NewTestLeeper going on a Pointy deletion spree. I feel like this might be middle ground that can reached with Drmies at least that won't leave the wine articles left as a wasteland. I encouraged NTL to take this to RfC if he feels so sincerely troubled by this but I'm wondering if he's afraid an RfC would cast light on his behavior. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:48, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Wrap-up of some recent external reviews Interview: World War I editors Op-ed: TomStar81 on the outbreak of World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Hawkeye7 looks at the military history of Austria-Hungary Timeleine: This month in World War I

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:07, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Nick-D on Britain in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars Timeline: This month in World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D on Britain in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars Timeline: This month in World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Nazi Germany's Eastern Front allies Op-ed: TomStar81 on the origins and legacy of trench warfare Timeline: This month in World War I

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cyndee Peters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sollentuna. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		God Jul och Gott Nytt År - Happy Holiday Cheer
		Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys!Hafspajen (talk) 02:48, 23 December 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Hawkeye7 on armoured reconnaissance and German scientists, Nick-D on time travelling historians Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the World War I Christmas truce Timeline: This month in World War I

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jan Peder Lamm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Värmdö. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:41, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tomas e! Thank you for all your great work on enWP! I see where you often are quite busy classifying the importance of WP bios of Swedes as "low". Once in a while I don't agree with your opinions and feel you need to be reversed. Questions for you:

1. What do you base your classifications on, other than your own personal opinions?
2. Do you really feel it's necessary to classify that many life stores as of "low" importance?
3. What's wrong with leaving them unclassified, is that some sort of failure on our part?
4. Do you ever classify any other articles than biographies?
5. Do you ever classify any life stories as being of more importance than "low"?

No offense intended. Just asking. Sincerely, --SergeWoodzing (talk) 19:59, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If memory serves me, we've had this discussion before, and I've not really changed my approach since then. My thinking is based on the following, although I might not have spelled it out in this much detail before:

• I assess all types of WP:Sweden articles. I did this over a longer period of time some years ago, and I've just returned to the task. Don't know if I'll continue doing it again over the coming months, we'll see. (Historically, I've also assessed a lot of WP:Wine articles, but I've not really returned to that project in the same way). I find the articles to assess primarily by checking lists of new articles related to Sweden (plus checking other articles linked in those articles), by going through categories of Sweden-related articles, and by checking up partially assessed articles, so there's no great mystery in why I choose the articles I choose. In recent times, biographies (largely sports- and entertainment-related), songs and music albums dominate this selection in terms of number of articles, but this is simply a reflection of what Sweden-related articles that have been created in 2014. As another example, some years ago I went through all localities and municipalities in Sweden and assessed them.
• WP:Sweden is not exclusively a biographical project and therefore biographies need to be considered in relation to other articles. I do consider articles on geographical locations, "general subjects on Sweden" and major Swedish companies and organisations more central to the project than the vast majority of individual biographical articles. Some biographical articles are of course quite central.
• My purpose in assessing the articles are primarily to have them properly tagged for WPSweden and some other project (such as WPBio). The project tags help significantly with housekeeping tasks (keeping track on deletion discussions, moves to other article names, automatic generations of lists of deficient articles related to Sweden, etcetera), and hopefully help people like yourself (those that are interested in Sweden-related subjects and can read Swedish-language sources). In principle a project tag without assessment of class and importance is able to do the same work. However, such "empty project tags" have sometimes been assigned by bots and tools, without really checking into the articles' merits. When I assign a full project tag, I also make some checks if other project tags should be added, if the article is properly categorised, and if it has any major deficiencies that calls for "quality templates" to be added. So for me, a full assessment means that I confirm that I've really taken a look at the article.
• I've strived to assess in a consistent way.
• I've basically taken the view that "positive evidence" is required for assigning importance higher than low, and for many categories of articles I've tried to create certain standards. For example: I've usually assessed prime ministers high, government ministers and non-PM party leaders mid, while leaving the run-of-the-mill members of parliament low. I've assigned low to almost all sportspeople, artists, businesspeople and scientists, and usually reserved mid for those that, roughly speaking, are obviously quite outstanding in their field by international (and not just domestic Swedish) standards. High has been reserved for a very select few that, roughly speaking, are obviously of enduring historical importance, and not just outstanding in their generation.
• Do notice that I definitely don't see importance=mid or high as some sort of "reference level", and importance=low as a sign of "should be deleted" or something similar. I suspect, based on previous discussions, that your reasoning involves this kind of "reference level" thinking.
• Therefore, I don't really see a problem in having 80-90% of the project's biographic articles as low-importance.
• This said, the percentage might be a bit too high today. I do not rule out that there is a substantial number of biographies (as well as articles on companies and organisations) that might justify mid-importance within "my scheme" but today are low-importance. Changing a few per cent of them - that's still hundreds of articles! - from low to mid in a consistent way wouldn't really affect the overall consistency. However, changing e.g. every article on Swedish children's authors or Swedish footballers or Swedish social democrats to at least mid-importance and many of them to high-importance would definitely remove the consistency of the scheme.
• However, I have to admit that I'm more concerned with the border between stub and start, than the border between low and mid. I have a feeling that I've been a bit too non-generous in assigning start-class to articles, and looked to much on their length excluding tables & infoboxes, also in the case of "small" subjects (such as articles on individual songs).
• Since I neither "own" the project or the individual assessments everyone is of course free to have their own opinions regarding assessments. I do think consistency is a very good idea, though, both across biographies and between biographies and other type of articles (geographical, organisations, works of art...).
• I might add that in my opinion, assessments should be changed rather than removed, if one disagrees with them.
• If I'm perfectly honest, though, I would consider it a much more valuable effort for Wikipedia and for WPSweden to improve 100 stub-class articles or to provide 100 articles with references than to change the importance of 1000 biographies. :-) But everyone is free to spend their time on things that other editors think less valuable! :-) Tomas e (talk) 21:18, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking all that time to reply!

I have no memory of having had this discussion with you before; sorry if you find me tedious.

Just brief answers to my questions would have been fine, but now I've read all of what you wrote and found a lot of it interesting anyway.

May I deduce then that your anwers to my 5 questions are as follows, as regards importance?

1. Personal opinions
2. Yes
3. It helps interested editors [not to spend too much time on them?] if they are classified ["low"?], and yes: failure [what's in brackets are my own asumptions as to what you mean]
4. Yes a few
5. Yes but very few

--SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:49, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Brief answers would not have sufficed to provide an understanding, given the way your questions were phrased. Your deductions as to (3) and (4) are somewhat strange, though. It would have been interesting to know if there was any answer to (1) that qualifies as anything else than "personal opinion" to you? I think that you might have a bit of a "hang up" on the phrase low as such, so why don't you consider the classes as importance 1, 2,3 and 4? You might consider the purpose of the classes 1-3 as a guide to which articles in the project that should get priority in getting up to at least FA-class, B-class/C-class and start-class in an ideal world, and which articles that it might be a good idea for many editors with a general interest in Sweden to have on their watchlist. Happy new year and happy editing ;-) Tomas e (talk) 12:22, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But "importance 1, 2,3 and 4" is not what we have to deal with here, so why discuss something that doesn't actually exist?

I'm trying very hard not to be offended by your presumption that I might have a "'hang up'", though I can't see any reason for you to get personal with an accusation like that. To me, the words "importance: low" in English mean just that: "importance: low", and that's what I brought up here, not "1,2,3,4". Perhaps you have a "hang up" about me? Sad, if so.

And perhaps the word "importance" is at least as problematic, whereas "priority" could be better, with the addition - right there! - of the name of the user giving the opinion in each case?

In essence, I find it hard to understand why you don't just clearly and briefly answer the five reasonable questions I asked you, rather than going into lots of stuff I didn't ask you about.

• If there's some other criteria than personal opinions that we Wikipedians are supposed to use in evaluating the importance to our readers of these life stories, I would, sincerely, like to know.
• If you are not to be considered interested mainly, regarding the evaluation of life stories, in evaluating them as of low importance, I would, sincerely, like to know that too.

I wrote to you out of respect and asked you reasonable questions, because I'd like to understand better some of the considerable time and effort that you put into this project, within a huge amount of other valuable work you do on it. So far, I feel I've been given a bit of a run-around plus a litlle personal jab, rather than straight answers based on the specific questions I asked. Why, I fear I might never know.

As I'm sure you realize, intelligent and perceptive as you are (when not focusing on any "hang up"), I may very well now be of an opinion which rather stongly objects to our evaluating life stories, expecially those under WP:BLP, as of "high", "medium" or "low importance" - that (to boot!) being one of the the first things a reader sees very prominently displayed when visiting an article's talk page, and that based solely on our own personal opinions, rather than on any other more substantial and neutrally reliable foundation. I don't see what gives us that right, nor why any such privilege or responsibility should exist for Wikipedia editors to exercise that kind of personal authority over other named individuals, living or dead.

• Is there any WP policy I could read that might make me better understand such privileges/responsibilities of ours?

Certainly other editors have also questioned things like this (though power also may tend to corrupt us).

As with all my opinions, even the strongest ones, I am always open to clear, constructive, non-personalized, well-founded arguments aimed at changing them. Anything like that coming up here? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:22, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear SergeWoodzing, I see absolutely no point in continuing this discussion on my talk page, since I don't find you particularly constructive. I suggest reading Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ and Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Guide/WikiProject#Assessment if you haven't already done so, and if you wish to discuss general assessment questions, find a suitable project talk page or other meta page instead. Your objections about the terminology chosen by the Project Council and the Wikipedia 1.0 task force, neither of which I've been a member of, do definitely not belong on my talk page. Further remarks from you on this subject on my talk page will therefore be deleted. Regards, Tomas e (talk) 23:28, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: for the record, the previous discussion with SergeWoodzing (talk · contribs) on this subject at this talk page happened five years ago (actually a bit longer ago than I thought) and can be read at User talk:Tomas e/Archive 2009#Importance of Articles on Living Swedes. Tomas e (talk) 00:15, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Tomas often assesses my articles. And in 99% of the cases he is correct^{[according to whom?]}. That is just my input.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:39, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are ongoing discussions about the use of "Importance" which flies against Biography guideline. This type of editing, and any other orders you might want to give me on the subject, should be avoided in the meantime. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:13, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not. Removals of assessments are not acceptable, as you should be well aware of. In this case we are talking about assessments for WikiProject Sweden. You have started a discussion over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Importance_rather_than_priority, another project, which so far (3.5 days) has only resulted in only one other comment, which did not agree with you. Tomas e (talk) 10:54, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Guje Sevón, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sanda. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On 19 January 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Carolina Neurath, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Swedish journalist Carolina Neurath ventured into acting when she starred as Princess Arianna Ad'lah in the film Star Wars: Threads of Destiny in 2014? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carolina Neurath. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Jonas Vinther on Hitler and Cliftonian on the Rhodesia Regiment Interview: 2014 Military History Newcomer Award nominees Review essay: Nick-D on the Australian War Memorial Op-ed: TomStar81 on the birth of strategic bombing Timeline: This month in World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Nick-D on the British Pacific Fleet Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the advent of chemical warfare Timeline: This month in World War I

Please take a look at the article about Måns Zelmerlöw. I have done several edits to improve the article ahead of his likely Melodifestivalen winning next weekend. Any further improvements are appreciated. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:24, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Recent external reviews Review essay: Nick-D on the Australian Fleet Air Arm Museum Op-ed: TomStar81 on submarine warfare in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the landing at Anzac Cove Op-ed: TomStar81 on the debut of poison gas in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Recent external reviews Op-ed: TomStar81 and Simon Harley on the sinking of the Lusitania Timeline: This month in World War I

Wedding of Prince Carl Philip, Duke of Värmland, and Sofia Hellqvist.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:57, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you wished for a (re)assessment, so I did it. Tomas e (talk) 13:27, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Recent external reviews Op-ed: TomStar81 on the new technology of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

I started a article about Clark Olofsson today. Take a look :) Any help appreciated.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:21, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was in good shape already when I saw it, although it doesn't contain his further activities from the 1980s and on. Tomas e (talk) 13:01, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Recent external reviews Review essay: Nick-D on sourcing articles about bombing a battleship Op-ed: TomStar81 on the role of nursing in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Second Schleswig War Interview: Featured picture participants Op-ed: TomStar81 on Indian nationalism during World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors, coordinator elections have begun Articles: Abbasids to a Yugoslav monitor Book reviews: Economics of warfare, Japan, and light horse Op-ed: We can (not) advance Timeline: This month in World War I

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Anotherclown and Sturmvogel 66 on war in the air and at sea Review essay: Auntieruth55 on the French Revolutionary Wars Op-ed: TomStar81 on the entry of Bulgaria in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

Kolla in Marie Serneholts artikel. Den blev vald till veckans TAFI artikel. Om du har tid vill säga.... --BabbaQ (talk) 22:29, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on the Battle of the Bulge Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the collapse of the Serbian Army in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on the German retreat from France in 1944 Op-ed: TomStar81 on empires of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

I created an article about singer Carina Jaarnek today. She died yesterday. If you want to, take a look.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:58, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good on a quick read-through, and a solid start-class. Tomas e (talk) 13:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[