User talk:Jon Harald Søby/Archive/1

Welcome!
Hi Jhs, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

""

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

""

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)

- Mailer Diablo 13:14, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Nauru
The use of such templates has been depracated as it was decided that having a half dozen templates at the bottom o every coutnry article was unsightly and not particularly helpful for the user. See also Wikiproject Countries for the general guideliens each country article is expected to follow. - SimonP 13:03, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

Ifdef
Hi, Jon. I was not quite thinking straight with what I was trying to do with the ifdef template. What I really wanted to find was something that could, in the case of Template:Testing a theory, just show the info from } and if the parameters  and  were not present at all. I just realised last night that ifdef is not meant to do that, so I'm not sure what made me think it could. But anyway, do you know a way to achieve the effect i described above? Thank you. --Tokle 11:12, 31 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Nope, sorry. There is another if template here, which I believe has a slightly different effect than, but I don't remember its name… Jon Harald Søby \ no na 05:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Could you have a look at it now: Template:Testing a theory. I'm trying it the other way round. If the parameters / are present, then you would not need /.
 * By the way, it's based on Template:Album infobox. --Tokle 15:56, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Fantomet
Javisst :) Var ett tag sen jag skrev nåt, men jag jobbar på det när jag kommer på nåt.


 * Flott karta till Phantom-artikeln! Jag funderar på om det skulle vara av intresse att lägga in även länder som tidigare har haft fantomenutgivning? (t.ex. Ryssland, Polen, Italien m.m.) eller tror du det blir "too much information?". Frågan är också vad man gör med länder som tidigare haft Fantomenutgivning, men idag bara finns i dagstidningar (t.ex. Mexiko). Ny färg för detta? Hör av dig om det verkar intressant iaf, så får du en lista med länder av mig. AEriksson 12:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Takk. Jeg tror det burde gå å ta med tidligere land også, og så ha stripete farger der det er «overlapping». Men jeg trenger ei liste over hvilke land det er… =/ Jon Harald Søby 17:29, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

IMDb Title
Hi. Did you intentionally put back the interwiki form? See Template talk:Imdb name for discussion - I removed it because you don't get an external link icon. --KJBracey 08:50, 28 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes – I didn't read the talk page beforehand, however. Commenting there now. Jon Harald Søby \ no na 15:09, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Greetings from the United Federation of Planets
You may find the folowing template of interest :) -- Cool CatTalk 02:44, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Username change
Your request has been fulfilled. Regards &mdash; Dan | talk 15:41, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you! =) Jon Harald Søby 16:29, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Congratulations on getting Jonathan Wild featured on the .no site. If you have any questions about Wild that I can answer, please feel free to contact me. (E.g. I wish I had researched Charles Hitchen before I did Wild, as I would have written more on their relationship into it.) Geogre 19:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Correcting bad facts?
In this edit you leave the comment "correcting bad facts" but you changed it from one wrong version to an even worse vesion.

The actual historical fact, to my knowledge not contested by anyone, is that I registered the domain name, I tested several different wiki packages, installing several to test, and then I installed the Wikipedia software. I made the first edits. This was absolutely not over any objections of mine but as the culmination of many many months of me complaining to Larry that the problem with Nupedia could be solved with a more open editing model. --Jimbo Wales 12:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

My mistake! I read the edit wrong. Your version is quite good. D'oh! I'm sorry, please ignore me. I shouldn't edit this early in the morning.--Jimbo Wales 13:21, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Hehe, no problem. As you said on IRC, it had to be changed. I could have changed the wording even more though, but I didn't have much time… Jon Harald Søby 12:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Jack Sheppard
Hi Jon, in May 2000 the British film production company FilmFour (owned by Channel 4) published the following news item: "FilmFour bolstered its Cannes slate by confirming that Tobey Maguire and Harvey Keitel are attached to play lead roles in Ben Ross' JACK SHEPPARD AND JONATHAN WILD. The film is to be produced by Robert Jones (THE USUAL SUSPECTS) for the Jones Co. from a screenplay by Ross and John Preston." (ifmagazine.com, May 3, 2000) Among others you could find this news on tobeyonline.com (May 10, 2000), variety.com (May 18, 2000) and Visual Imagination, Film Review (August 2000). Something went wrong, obviously, but the film project did really exist. The director and screenwriter Benjamin Ross (born in 1964 in London, see hollywood.com biography) would smile at your conjecture that "IMDb did not have any directors by that name" although "the Wikipedia link led to an American Football player" indeed. --Bogart99 17:01, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank you for your kind words. Here's to the next million! Nach0king 00:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

RE: Your comments
I find it "somewhat ironic" that you would leave what might be construed as an uncivil comment, without having ever edited any LOST-related articles. Along with a number of other editors, I have spent a great deal of time fending off the daily barrage of Original Research that gets inserted into the articles by well-meaning anonymous fans. It was entirely appropriate to point the individual to Wikipedia policies, which are frequently ignored by those who show up only to to promote their personal theories. Please take a look at just how many times this sort of fancruft gets introduced and removed from the main Lost article. The earlier that it's snipped in the bud, the better. As I keep pointing out— and intend to eventually have added to the What Wikipedia Is Not Policy— "Wikipedia is not a fansite". If you have any suggestions as to how I might more pleasantly inform such a new editor that unverified theories are not appropriate to Wikipedia, please let me know. — LeflymanTalk 23:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply. You may be right that I was a bit brusque in throwing out the line "save such theories for fan sites" -- probably because I've repeated it so many times, in different phrasing :) LOST, in particular, is a pop-cultural magnet for fan theorisation; new editors there (and likely all over Wikipedia!) frequently misunderstand that even an article about a TV show should only document what has been published elsewhere, rather than be used as an forum to present their own knowledge/ideas. — LeflymanTalk 02:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Conversion of external links into footnotes

 * On the Queen discussion page, you mentioned that the external links should be turned into footnotes. I would be happy to do this myself, but I don't know how to. Would you be willing to do that? I think that the Queen article is almost ready to become a featured article candidate. TheImpossibleMan 10:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure, I'll do it asap. Jon Harald Søby 13:52, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for doing that. Out of curiosity, is there anything else that you think need to be done before Queen is ready to become a featured article? TheImpossibleMan 07:22, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't know. I'll read through it to see if it needs more citations. It should probably get some literature references as well, though, not only online ones. Jon Harald Søby 08:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * There are claims made in relation to books, particularly the book "Mercury and Me", by Jim Hutton (i.e. "According to the book Mercury and Me, by Jim Hutton...."). Not sure if that's what you mean.TheImpossibleMan 22:13, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I intend to add Mercury and Me as a reference... I've been thinking. There are a few points in the article in which citations are needed. Outside of that, I don't think there is anything stopping Queen from becoming a featured article. Since I nominated it last time, would you be willing to nominate it, once it is ready? TheImpossibleMan 10:57, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Could you help me?
Hi Jon, I am trying to polish the Bjørnøya article some more (see Talk:Bjørnøya). One thing that seems to be lacking is a pronunciation guide in IPA style. Unfortunately, neither my knowledge of spoken Norwegian nor of the phonetic alphabet is good enough to make one. Do you happen to know who could help? Kosebamse 10:14, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks! Kosebamse 14:28, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The two points where I am unsure are: is the stress on the first or second syllable? - I seem to remember having heard both variants, but not sure; and the length of the second "ø" - is it short like the first one, or long? Thanks, Kosebamse 15:15, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot, that will certainly do. Happy editing og ha det bra, Kosebamse 18:57, 24 March 2006 (UTC) Kosebamse 18:57, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Bare hyggelig. =) Jon Harald Søby 18:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks yet again! Kosebamse 08:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

One question still, I am really not familiar with IPA, but from Pronunciation respelling for English (an IPA version for the uninitiated) it would seem that [bjœːɳøja] or perhaps  [bjɝːɳøja] might be even better than [bjøːɳøja], what do you think? Kosebamse 08:55, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * No, I think ø is the better sign; the examples in Close-mid front rounded vowel fit this sound exactly. Jon Harald Søby 10:32, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll use that then, and thanks again. Kosebamse 10:38, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Please help me, as well

 * I'm trying to get I Am the Walrus made a featured article. I do have one question that I was hoping you'd answer. In the article, a lot of stuff is claimed that isn't immediately cited. Most of the info in the article comes from two external links, which are listed in the References section of the article. My question is this: Do I need to add a after every single claim? Or can I just leave those links in the References section? TheImpossibleMan 12:58, 28 March 2006 (UTC)