Talk:Ann-Sophie Qvarnström

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ann-Sophie Qvarnström. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151022201934/http://www.rollspelsakademien.com/utgivare_1.aspx to http://www.rollspelsakademien.com/utgivare_1.aspx
 * Added tag to http://www.rollspelsakademien.com/produkt_95.aspx
 * Added tag to http://www.rollspelsakademien.com/produkt_80.aspx
 * Added tag to http://www.rollspelsakademien.com/produkt_98.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:39, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion on deleting this article
I am pinging you as you contributed to the discussion. It does not seem clear from the discussion that you were aware that Ann-Sophie Qvarnström, User:W.carter who created the article, and the anonymous IPs are the same person. In the discussion, User:W.carter claims that Qvarnström was my test subject. Her different aliases debate between themselves. Julle explicitly identified all the unnamed IPs as the nominator. (User:W.carter). User:W.carter did not respond when asked about the accounts. User:W.carter said she was happy for it to be deleted and now freely admits she is Ann-Sophie Qvarnström, so perhaps the AfD decision should be reviewed. It is some time ago, so perhaps further sanctions are not needed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:24, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Charlesjsharp is doing this to get back at me in a longstanding feud between him and me on Commons, that recently escalated. See: . I have certainly never used an IP-adress here, that is his own fabrication. I have also previously explained why I was anonymous at first on the Wiki Project, see User talk:W.carter/Archive 22. Now he is bitter since I stood up to him on Commons and this is the result. I'm of course standing by my previous vote and early attempt to have the article deleted. Since I'm no longer a newbie, I know not to write anything like that. So I really guess I should thank Charles since he is suggesting what I myself want. If the article is to exist, someone else should write it. --cart  -Talk  14:37, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Coola here, i did not really contribute to the afd except for listing it with the artists afd list, anyway, an article's talkpage is a place where editors discuss improving an article, not deleting it, thats what afd is for. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:52, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I made my decision based on my evaluation of the Swedish sources, and spent some time digging up a few new sources myself and rewriting the article to make it more encyclopedic, pruning some parts. The article should be judged based on the merits of notability and sourcing, which I think are good enough. /Julle (talk) 15:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding so quickly Julle. But did you make a mistake? User:W.carter denies the IPs were her. It's quite a serious claim from a memeber of WMF, and I am doing her a disservice if you were wrong. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:21, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Charles, if you enter the IPs in an IP locator (you can Google how to find one), you will find that the nominator and IPs originate in Japan and by now you should know I live in Lysekil. cart -Talk  16:03, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * To clarify, I pointed out that all three IPs active in the discussion had explicitly identified as the nominator, per Special:Diff/919900773 and Special:Diff/920180699. I had no intention to connect the IPs to any specific username, as the nomination for deletion was signed by 110.165.186.42 and not a registered account. /Julle (talk) 16:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * My only contribution was to delsort the AfD. I'm not bothered one way or the other. If you want it deleted then nominate it for AfD again. The talkpage is certainly not the place for a deletion discussion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:55, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

I have been advised that the post could be considered harrassment, so I have struck it out and apologise. There must be a better way to resolve disputes. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:31, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh hello. I did not participate in this discussion and I only added it to relevant deletion categories. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 21:28, 5 July 2021 (UTC)