User talk:Johan Magnus

/Archive 1

Welcome
Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

Just have fun! --mav

Swedish
I gathered it had something to do with Finnish-Swedish. However, the discussions you have had so far are far from transparent. For an outsider, it would be difficult to understand about what you are even disagreeing. The three users involved so far (Peter, Tuomas and you, it seems) should each give a brief exposition of how they would organize things, rather than just reverting each other. I'm sorry, I cannot help at all, since I have no knowledge of Swedish dialects, see also my reply on Karmosin's talk page. But if you all remember to cite sources, I am sure there will be a satisfactory solution. dab (&#5839;) 08:39, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I aim at taking it calm. Tuomas is (obviously) easier to provoke, that belongs to the Youth, doesn't it, but has on the other hand contributed with (in my opinion) quite constructive edits. Peter has similarly contributed with sound files, which is worth much praise.


 * My judgement is that Peter wishes to prescribe his own dialect as the norm for pronounciation for all Swedish speakers, which in my opinion quite simply doesn't fit with reality, besides causing bad blood both in the South and the East. It's to me rather much as when Canadians upset their fellow North Americans by arguing that their Canadian English is more correct, you see?


 * It may be noted that Tuomas (and I believe also Ruhrjung) have expressed reservations against what he/they perceive as the exaggerated sureness many Swedes possess, that their personal dialect is the one and only correct variant. See also: Ruhrjung commenting on the sje-sound.


 * The whole issue is not only intertwined with traditional disappointments between Swedes and Finns, but also with the surge of refugees and other immigrants to Sweden (suddenly 12% of the population), that in the last decades unfortunately have experienced extreme unimployment figures and many kinds of de facto segregation and disadvantageous treatment, which however is very much of a non-issue in the public discourse. My guess is that Peter here echoes attitudes typical for "official Sweden" which may touch chords in the minds of people who feel they see that the emperor is naked. From my own spouse, who has lived in Sweden since 1986, i know that the choice between the different prestige dialects is a tricky and crucial issue, particularly for academics and other aspiring middle class people, that teachers and "official Sweden" often forgot to speak the truth about.


 * Then there are a couple of factual disputes lurking below the surface, as for instance if the r-assimilation really can be considered a phonemic feature, which I don't really believe &mdash; although in fact not so few Swedish linguists (at least in popular literature) seem to gloss over such issues by indistinct writings on "sounds". (This is an issue that maybe is somewhat similar to the German dispute with regard to if  in -chen is an allophone of /ch/ or what).


 * Finally, I would like to stress that I studied linguistics a year in the 1980s, but have made very little (if any) use of that since then, and I am not inclined to impose as a student of linguistics.


 * However, if someone removes the reference to the meaning of Reichsschwedisch as understood in Finland from a disambiguation page, in direct confrontation against a wording I contributed with to the Swedish language Wikipedia (sv:Rikssvenska) on March 7, that since then isn't changed, I think this can be promptly reverted as disingenious attempts of pure and simple falsification (unless it's understood as a calculated provokation, of course). A singular contributor's ignorance, or Sweden's National Encyclopedia's policy with regard to the Finland-Swedes, can't be a reason to remove a field from a disambiguation page.
 * --Johan Magnus 09:29, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about the RfC concerning the Swedish pages. Unfortunately I really don't know enough about Swedish to be able to contribute meaningfully to the conversation. I did say at Talk:Rikssvenska that I don't think Rikssvenska is an appropriate disambig page since it doesn't direct the reader to two or more articles containing that name. --Angr 14:30, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

RfC concerning Swedish articles
I would be happy to help out, but I probably won't get a chance to get around to looking at the issues in detail for a few weeks. CyborgTosser (Only half the battle) 01:24, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Category:Swedish language
I stumbled over Talk:Rikssvenska that is on my watchlist, and wrote a lengthy comment. Then I discovered plenty of changes and some new related articles, and I have neither the time nor inspiration to try to understand what it is that in reality is going on here. It seems like quite some mess to me.

I would like to ask you to check the categorizing of these and related articles.

I also ask you to consider my idea, expressed in Talk:Rikssvenska, of moving entries on Högsvenska and Rikssvenska to the Wiktionary. See how people react first, of course!

Of course I have opinions with regard to what's currently occurring. I wonder if maybe Peter aims at making the articles he is interested in so qualified and supremely academic that he feels to be in control of "his" articles. If so (which of course is only a hunch), then maybe you are one of the few Wikipedians who would be academically qualified to follow his reasoning. Needless to say, I think this would be a great disfavor for Wikipedia. The content must first and foremost be relevant to the expected readership.

There is of course nothing wrong with the notion that (for instance) the Swedish National Encyclopedia only considers the Sweden-Swedish meaning of the word Rikssvenska, or that some specific linguist has defined one or another concept this or that way, but to feign that such a meaning of the word should be the one and only... Oh, my God!

Take care!

--Ruhrjung 09:52, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

RfC
Your behavior and edits concerning articles relating to Swedish has resulted in a joint Request for Comments for users Johan Magnus, Ruhrjung and Tuomas. You're encouraged to respond at Requests for comment/Johan Magnus, Ruhrjung, Tuomas. Peter Isotalo 20:27, May 2, 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you for noticing me. I'll try to create a response.
 * --Johan Magnus 22:13, 3 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your reply, but since it has already been a week since the RfC was filed, I would like you to submit a proper response. We can't expect to get outside comments if only one side has submitted a proper response. Mind you, the request from David Gerard about diffs about my behavior wasn't supposed to be just for his own amusement, but rather for everyone to take part of.
 * Peter Isotalo 23:29, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Kicki_-_Gunnar_Johansson,_nov_1952.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Kicki_-_Gunnar_Johansson,_nov_1952.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 16:14, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Factbook section
A tag has been placed on Template:Factbook section requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Floorball
Zadora13 (talk) 03:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Missing
Hi. You are now listed as missing. Should you ever return or choose not to be listed, you are welcome to remove your name. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 15:21, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Dictature listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dictature. Since you had some involvement with the Dictature redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. &thinsp;&mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)&thinsp; 21:38, 10 September 2018 (UTC)