User talk:Liftarn/Archive 1

Open Site
Heh, thanks. I'm just trying to be reasonable, and create something that's neutral, as opposed to pro-or-anti-ODP. If you've got any ideas for making it more neutral (Delirium commented that it was a wee bit on the pro side, and I was afraid I might have done that), feel free to make changes...it'd be appreciated. Oh, and just out of curiosity...I noticed in the Open Site page history that you made a nasty edit there...did we fire you or something? :P -- Ambivalenthysteria


 * Huh? I think you missed something in the edit history of Open Site. The nasty remark was from 64.109.201.77, not me. // Liftarn

Re: Garrett Morgan, traffic light
Greetings Liftarn,

There is quite a bit of evidence against Garrett Morgan inventing the first traffic light of any type. Same goes for the gas mask.

Huntington/Nobel Prize Economics
Hey - why did you change the Nobel Laureat in Economics mention in the Huntington article? I am aware that the economic prize is seperate from the regular (and original) nobel prizes, but its winners are commonly (and officially) reffered to as Nobel Laureats - both on Wikipedia's Nobel Prize article and on the official webpage of the NP committee. I would like to revert your change. Any thoughts? bastel 18:39, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I understand what you are saying and I am aware that there is a certain amount of controversy around this issue. However, a google search for "Nobel Laureat in Economics" (in quotations), the term you changed, returns >23000 hits, the first one the official nobelprize.org site, the other's including all major US Universities and a lot of international organizations such as UN and ILO. An equivalent search for the lengthy "winner of the..." you inserted returns barely mor than 300. There are four reasons I want to change it back: a) it sounds clumsy in terms of language b)Nobel Laureat in Economics is common usage, the expression you propose is not c) It is a term accepted by the nobel prize committee d)It is not the same as "nobel prize winner in economics" and does not imply that there literally is a "nobel prize in economics".

That said, I'll change it back to the origingal for clarity's sake, hope that's not a big issue for you bastel 14:39, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I understand that you object to the term nobel prize in economics and I understand why. I tried to make that clear from the beginning. However, the term "nobel prize in economics" was never in the article on S. P. Huntington. It said nobel laureat (now it says Bank of Sweden Nobel Laureat, which I hope is unobjectable in any case). I have attempted to support my use of the term with both authoritative sources and arguments, if you want to convince me of your position, you'll have to do likewise. best - bastel 22:45, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Netesq
Netesq is mainly (basicly only) active in the Open Directory Project article by deleting information anybody except himself add. Attempts to start a discussion with him regarding this has only been met with silence. He is a known ODP hater so his bias is rather obvious. // Liftarn 16:25, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Liftarn and I are involved in an edit war, and this is an attempt to poison the well with a personal attack. I would like to respond, but I am unable to do so without violating established rules of Wikiquette. -- NetEsq 16:47, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Ha! You're doing fine so far: attempt to poison the well --Uncle Ed 18:59, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * NetEsq is not a problem user, and it is poor form to take a dispute over a single article into this page. It takes two to get into an edit war. I note that this issue was not first raised on user talk:NetEsq, as strongly recommended. Therefore I intend to move this comment to user talk:Liftarn. Martin 18:43, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi liftarn- I was wondering if you could clarify the chronology of the various Dan Dare series- i've left a comment at Talk:Dan Dare explaining my query in more detail, thanks quercus robur 20:11, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi Liftarn. I wondered if you could supply some references for Ford Köln. Every reference I find for the word is for the name of Ford's German subsidiary. DJ Clayworth 18:00, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Any WP User with any experience at all would know that such an edit would be immediately reverted. I conclude that you were being deliberately provocative. Adam 11:00, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Then I must be inexperienced because I quite frankly don't see what's so controversial with adding two links and some missing information. Please explain. // Liftarn

I have no opinion on the links you added. I was refering to the political opinion you inserted in the opening section, as I'm sure you know. Adam 11:56, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Then why did you repitedly delete the links? // Liftarn

I don't think "form of racism" can be reasonably considered part of the definition of Zionism. Zionism can be defined as, among other formulations, the movement for Jews to have an independent state in the Middle East (Israel). This can then be interpreted in a number of ways&mdash;it might be justified, or it might be racist, or it might be something else. But those are interpretations, not part of the definition. --Delirium 11:34, Feb 11, 2004 (UTC)


 * I can be (and has been) defined as a "form of racism". I agree that the definition probably doesn't belong in the zionism article, but it should be included in the anti-zionism article since it's not uncommon that people are opposed to zionism on anri-racist grounds. // Liftarn

The definition of Zionism is "a political movement among Jews aimed at the creation of a Jewish state." That Zionism is a form of racism is an opinion, which is highly contested and therefore does not belong in the opening paragraph. The question is discussed in the appropriate place in the article. Adam 12:42, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * The text "It follows that anti-Zionism is opposition to these objectives, and that any person, organisation or government that opposes these objectives can in some sense be described as anti-Zionist." that follows the different definitions gets an entierly different meaning if one definition is excluded. That definition isn't included under "Defining anti-Zionism" either. // Liftarn

I don't really know what you're talking about, but you are of course free to make edits to the text. Just as I am free to revert them if you insert your opinions into the text. A lot of work has gone into creating a balanced text at both this article and Zionism and edits that weaken that will be reverted, if not by me then by others. Adam 13:08, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Ok, let's take this text as an example: "Widgetism is the idea that everybody should live happily. It means that anti-widgetists are in opposition to these objectives." This is clearly POV if the anti-widgetists think that widgetism wants to reach the goal by painting all cars pink. Do you see what I'm getting at? Using the text as an example it would leave people wondering what anti-widgetists have against everybody living happily. // Liftarn

Sniper or soldier?
You changed "soldier" into "sniper" in Tom Hurndall, but how do you know that? IDF "snipers" have special equipment and training. Was this soldier one of such people? We couldn't answer this question before which is why we changed "sniper" into "soldier". --Zero 10:22, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Ok, fair enough. All the reports I have read said it was a sniper so I thought it was an established fact. // Liftarn

St. Louis Blues
EMERGENCY! Infrogmation has vandalised your contributions to St. Louis Blues. Please ask all hockey fans to vote at Talk:St. Louis Blues to keep St. Louis Blues as a National Hockey League page and not a redirect to a disambiguation page. Thank You! -- 24.217.211.99 07:53, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

my nomination for admin
Hi, I just wanted to let you know that Dori has nominated me for admin at Requests for adminship. Since you and I have had conflicts, I wanted to give you a heads up so you can show your support or dissent. Nohat 20:00, 2004 Apr 15 (UTC)

License ?
Hi, you tell you've painted the picture Image:Jolly-roger.png but could you tell me its license ? Is it GFDL or public domain or so ? Thanks in advancE. Tipiac 08:26, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Icelandic Sheepdog
All the best to you and your dog. Regards Gangleri 00:08, 2004 Oct 4 (UTC)
 * Hi Liftarn! Thanks for your answer. I am new here and one of the things I want to work on are issues related to Icelandic sheepdogs. When arriving I saw that Requested pictures mentioned at WikiProject Dog breeds. We provided the picture which is now also at the Russian and Esperanto versions. You can find more pictures at . Just click (for example) on the leftmost picture.
 * During the last two weeks I was trying to get familiar with Wikipedia and the whole family. Have you found Talk:Icelandic Sheepdog already? On Icelandic Sheepdog in national languages I started about the names for the dog in different languages. Would be happy if you have some additions to this list. Please not make modifications directly, because I would like to move it to meta or Wictionary. Please let your commens either at User talk:Gangleri or at Talk:Icelandic Sheepdog or send me an e-mail. Thanks.
 * Do you have contacts to Finnland? Would be nice to have an article / stub there too. How is your Danish?

Sports Cars
Why did you add all those Saab sedans to the sports car category where they obviously don't belong? -- stewacide

Re:Haas School of Business
There's no such thing as a "Bank of Sweden" laureate. Who uses the term? The term overwhelming used for winners of the Prize in Economics is "Nobel laureate". There's nothing wrong with that as long as the term "Nobel Prize in Economics" isnt specifically used. --Jiang 17:49, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, but please don't call it a nobel prize.

Adminship
Recently I did some analysis of contribution history for Wikipedia, the fruits of which are at Another list of Wikipedians in order of arrival. As I reviewed the list, I noted that there are about a dozen longtime contributors who have not been made administrators. You are one of them. Accordingly, I would like to nominate you for adminship, with your permission. If you would appreciate such a nomination, please let me know on my talk page. If you do wish to decline, a note so saying would also be appreciated, though not necessary. Kindest regards, The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:43, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Nordisk familjebok?
Image:Anchor1.png, etc. Could you explain to me what a Nordisk familjebok is, and how the images provided (which I really like!) fall into the public domain? Just indulging my personal curiousity. - Amgine 21:42, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Amgine might want to know that the popular encyclopedia, Nordisk familjebok has its own Wikipedia entry now! --Wetman 23:38, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to... using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. So far over 90% of people who have responded have done this.
 * 1) ...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
 * 2) ...all articles...


 * Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff.  So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the   template (or    for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:


 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace   with   . If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. It's important to know, even if you choose to do anything so I don't keep asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk) 14:37, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

Doric order
Would you be upset if I removed the Doric capital illustration, from the Nordisk familjebok which you originally downloaded? Now there are much better examples at the entry. --Wetman 23:38, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * No problem. When I added it the article had no illustration at all. // Liftarn

CKD
Do you have any plans with CKD? In its present state it is ripe for VFD. JFW | T@lk  12:26, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Martin Bergstrand
Hello. Are you Martin Bergstrand? Or is he perhaps a friend of yours? – Quadell (talk) (help)  02:19, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)


 * Neither. The name sounds a bit familliar, but I can't place it. (Did a search) Ah, him! Not really a friend as such. He's a fellow member of the Swedish SAAB Club (www.saabklubben.com). I was given permission to use his photos as long as he was credited. // Liftarn

I added a clear rendering of a MacPherson strut. --Casito 11:41, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Splinter Cell
Perfectly valid? The link is spam. What use is an "Open directory" that only links to other websites and offers absolutely nothing else? This type of link is discouraged on Wikipedia. See: External links (I quote) "Pages that are linked to in an external links section should be high content, with information that is not found in the Wikipedia article." Therefore the link is nonsensical and I'll revert it everytime. K1Bond007 21:48, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)

Saab 9000
So what engine DID the 9000 use if not the Triumph/Saab Slant-4? Did Saab have another straight-4? --SFoskett 21:08, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Image:MacPhersonStrut.jpg
I've gone ahead and tagged that image as gfdl, because that is the standard license that is applied to all images where the uploader holds the copyright. If this is unsatisfactory, please feel free to change it or contact me to pick a more suitable tag. --Aqua 09:42, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)


 * It's OK. But I think the image is not in use any more. // Liftarn

Mike Follin
I picked up your article on Recent Changes just after it had been created. It appeared to be like so many others about computer programmers - a short biography about some relatively unknown person, so I flagged it for deletion. However, I did find some stuff about Follin on the 'Net, so it seemed reasonable there should be an article about him, hence removal of the speedy delete. I'll be a little less hasty next time! Cheers, Arcturus 20:49, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (movie)
This page needs to be moved back to where it was. The fairy tale that Walt Disney's film originates from is simply titled Snow White (there are two; both are mentioned in the article), not Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. I am already working to get moderator assistance to do this. --FuriousFreddy 13:56, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Ok, I have already fixed the faulty wikilink from Brothers Grimm. // Liftarn

Dixy Lee Ray plutonium comment
Do you have a source? I've just done some cursory searching and found no mentions of such a remark. RadicalSubversiv E 08:32, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * It may be an urban legend. It's often quoted here in Sweden. // Liftarn

Was there ever a straight-14 or straight-24
I have my doubts. The Napier Sabre was a H-24, which is something else. -- Egil 16:19, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

A55RGY
Hi, Liftarn! You added A55RGY to Unusual articles, but no article under that name appears to exist. Can you double check your edit? Thanks! -- Coneslayer 14:51, 2005 Apr 15 (UTC)

Knots
Hi, I came upon your image image:Nf knots.png. It's used at Knot, with a caption that claims that knot 10 is a round turn and two half hitches. Frankly, I don't see a round turn, and the alleged two half hitches looks more like a clove hitch. Perhaps you could clear up the confusion. I've watchlisted your talk page, so you may reply right here. --Smack (talk) 04:09, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

The image is from Nordisk familjebok and it's in Swedish. So the list is I have no idea how they translate to English. // Liftarn
 * 1) garn-knop
 * 2) fallrepsknop
 * 3) käringknop
 * 4) taljerepsknop
 * 5) ormhufvud
 * 6) vantknop
 * 7) pertkunta
 * 8) överhandsknop
 * 9) sjömansknop
 * 10) halvslag om egen part

Norwegian dog breeds
FYI, Norwegian Buhund is not the same as the Norwegian Elkhound; I removed the redirect. Ya learn something new every day. :-) Elf | Talk 15:47, 12 May 2005 (UTC)


 * They do look very simmilar. // Liftarn

They do. Just so happens that we had a photo waiting for an article, so I added that. Elf | Talk 16:42, 12 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Great! Why not add the photo to the commons? // Liftarn

Because there are a billion dog-related photos already local (see List of images/Nature/Animals/Dogs for the probably-usable ones and List of images/Nature/Animals/Dogs/Photos in question for the unknown or probably-not usable), and no one seems to have had the energy or interest in spending time moving them all over to commons when the commons was finally created & implemented. Elf | Talk 20:04, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Image:1987volvo244small.jpg
Burgundavia (&#9992; take a flight?) 09:18, May 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi Liftarn. I've took the liberty of adding GFDL-presumed to the above image. Please verify if this is correct by adding to the image description page. Thanks Craigy [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|15px]] (talk) July 4, 2005 21:08 (UTC)

Thansk, but since it's available at Commons (Image:1987volvo244.JPG) it's not a problem. // Liftarn

Batman (game)
The review offered by Your Sinclair was in fact 91% on release - the 80% came two years later when the title was released under the Hit Squad label. Thanks for the major updates to the article though. Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs, Me 07:45, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hirsch tuning
The Hirsch package is available only as an aftermarket modification. Check the Saab Performance by Hirsch website. --Pc13 June 30, 2005 10:28 (UTC)


 * I got the impression it was available as an option directly when ordering. I know it's not on the website. I guess I need to visit a dealer to ask them directly. I need some power steering fluid anyway. // Liftarn


 * It's neither on the official website or on the media website either. Global GM press website technical specifications here. I did find a 2002 press release, here's a quote: "Developed in association with Hirsch Performance AG of Switzerland, the sporty engine, chassis and styling aftermarket enhancements include a choice of power upgrades to 305 or 280 bhp. They are available from 1 October exclusively through Saab dealerships in Sweden, the United Kingdom, Germany and Switzerland" - I've bolded the relevant parts. (Tell me if you have any trouble viewing the press-releases - if a password is needed I can't give it to you, unfortunately, they're for media use only). --Pc13 July 8, 2005 18:29 (UTC)

Anti Zionism
We've lapsed into what I think is pretty blatent POV again in anti-zionism a third party view would help. It's easy to lose sight of when you're just pushing a point that's not worth making. 62.253.64.14 6 July 2005 20:41 (UTC)

List of political epithets
Hi there. I've put some links into the talk section on "Self-hating Jew" which you might want to look at - I think there may need to be a compromise viia rewording, even if it extends the text a little. Possibly there might need to be similar work on the main article in Self-hatred. Thanks illWill 14:14, 28 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Maybe - the case with Jayjg is that he has strong opinions but also has respect for consensus. I think if more people read the links, there would be consensus for a reword. illWill 16:18, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Debate on this issue rumbles on (see the talk page for details). I think for your own benefit, you should take Jayjg's advice and separate your edits up so that they don't all get reverted because of the few controversial ones. I know it might seem like he's reverting your stuff deliberately, but you have to take into account how many page Jayjg watches (thousands, as far as I can tell) - he probably just doesn't have time to reword controversial entries. Also, I don't think he's suggesting that everybody who gets called a 'self-hating jew' is one - I just don't think he believes that the phrase is commonly applied to detractors of Israel. I think this is a question of position -a moderate pro-Israeli like him probably doesn't hear the word applied to other Jews as much as I do; I've been at plenty of political meetings that have been disrupted by Zionist extremists attacking other Jews.

Also, I don't think you're ever going to get that term "homo oppression" added - I'd just drop it if I were you. The shortend term 'homo' is almost exclusively pejorative, so it will always get edited out. Thanks illWill 22:17, 31 July 2005 (UTC)


 * That one I don't care much about anyway. // Liftarn

Top posting
Aloha, Liftarn. I noticed that some users have been top posting new comments on Talk:List of political epithets. This makes it difficult to follow the threads as many of the current topics continue to be added to the bottom. --Viriditas | Talk 10:58, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

RFM
Liftarn, I had already responded on the RFM page there long before you dropped the note on my Talk: page; please see my response there for details. Jayjg (talk) 15:13, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

3RR
You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia for 24 hours due to having violated its three revert rule. Upon your return, please adhere to Wikipedia policy. You may still edit this page, however (I've placed this talk page on my watchlist). El_C 02:40, 2 August 2005 (UTC)


 * What!? The edits were all different? How can this possible be a case of 3RR? // Liftarn

You've reverted  over three times; the other party held this to be a contested addition (and placement). El_C 07:28, 2 August 2005 (UTC)


 * It should be noted that the conclusion of the reference have not been contested on the talk page and only a single time in edit comments. If you want to see 3RR violations you should have a look at the Guy Montag and Jayjg edit team. I suspect Guy Montag is a flesh puppet for Jayjg. // Liftarn


 * Once your block period expires, you may wish to report your sockpuppet suspicions to Wikipeidia founder, Jimmy Wales, since he had just personally appointed Jayjg as an Arbitrator a few weeks ago. Otherwise, please review more closely the 3RR policy. El_C 02:37, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Interwiki?
I am trying to understand the recent edit you made on Bluegrass music which you marked "interwiki". It appears to have created a link to a disambiguation page (Bluegrass) which would lead readers seeking info on the music back to the same article? Perhaps there is a cross-language purpose which I don't understand? Cmadler 14:02, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Pro circumcision POV pushers are attempting to censor wikipedia
Thank you for agreeing with proposal to use the term intact rather than uncircumcised in the main circumcision article. Not to sound melodramatic but its become clear that pro circumcision POV pushers are censoring wikipedia uninhibitedly, which can be seen in their attempt to remove the article Aposthia and vandalizing the disambiguation page at uncircumcised to eliminate any other interpretations of the word supported by the dictionary that they feel improves their political agenda. For the sake of intellectual freedom I emplore you to look into these matters and make choice about how you will respond. Thanks again. Sirkumsize 02:36, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Be aware
Jayjg is running around to a lot of folks with the following reposting and reposting the following message;
 * I have run into what I consider disruptive behaviour and WP:POINT at List of political epithets. In my view, User:Liftarn has been removing material and asking for citations for material which has already been cited, and has been insisting on citations exclusively for, and inserting NPOV notices in, Jewish-related epithets, when no citations have been provided for any of the other epithets on the page, and when he has raised no specific objections in Talk:. Could you possibly take a look? Jayjg (talk) 15:47, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

So, be aware! --Irishpunktom\talk 16:25, August 19, 2005 (UTC)

I've copied you in to my response to Jayjg re:epithets
Hello Liftarn. Jayjg contacted me re: the political epithets page, so i thought i'd copy you my lengthy response.

Hi Jay. I’ve taken a look at the edit history of the article and, whilst it is true that Liftrarn is disrupting this article to make a point, If I'm being fair I can vaguely understand why he’s doing it. I think there seems to be a greater burden of proof attached to certain sections, which is based on the fact that many editors originate from common backgrounds where epithets can be understood to mean the same things – and so less proof is required to them. This also means that people are more used to collaborating with each other to produce mutually acceptable definitions. You personally don’t need to be told that when the term ‘Zionist’ appears in a Syrian newspaper op-ed it isn’t referring to Theodore Herzl, but this might be a lot less obvious to people from different backgrounds (such as many of my fellow leftists, for example). Conversely, when I read the word ‘Commie,’ I can easily work out whether it is an accurate description of somebody’s politics or a political slur, but I can’t assume the same of everybody. The large number of individual sections of the article, and correspondingly large number of editors/viewpoints, mean that it’s pretty messy, and so much easier to devolve into edit wars.

I think the focus on the Jewish section is not too surprising because there are a number of editors who are working from a specific viewpoint (pro-Israeli, if somebody wants to be reductive), whose views sometimes coincide with a number of right-wingers who also edit the article (including troublemakers like Coqsportif). This gives the article the impression of being slanted towards one POV occasionally, even if this isn’t actually the case. Liftarn seems to have become annoyed at being outnumbered, and is reacting by disrupting the article. Personally, I don’t think Liftarn’s inputs to the article are much more disruptive than some of Guy Montag’s, who has also removed compromise edits on a number of occasions, though this is may be to do with difficulty in keeping track of a very fragmented talk page discussion.

There is also an inherent difficulty in citing and sourcing this article in that political epithets, by their very nature, are often euphemistic and change their meaning depending on who uses them and in what context they are used. For example, the only people that I have ever heard use the term ‘Islamo     t’ are islamophobes, so I would naturally lean towards including that information in the article. However, this is possibly because, unlike US-based editors, I live in a country with a high Muslim population where it is not acceptable to use that term in print, so I try and assume that the term has different connotations in different countries, based on different media standards. Conversely, the terms ‘Judeo     m’ and ‘Zionazi’ are sometimes used in my personal experience by people who are not anti-Semites, but just lack tact and/or experience of talking politics with Jewish people, whereas I doubt this is the case in the US as people are more aware of Jewish concerns, and also more likely to be offended by the term ‘Nazi’ than they are here. This is only an example, as I think similar distinctions would apply to many, if not the majority, of the epithets cited. Consider the wildly varying interpretations of a term such as ‘liberal’, which means utterly different things in different English-speaking populations.

The problem is cased by the extent to which people keep asserting their own understandings of the epithets – to use Guy as an example again, I don’t think he is very well placed to understand the use of terms in circles politically critical to Israel (which are more diverse than he credits), as his reaction will always be emotionally clouded by preconceived opinions. In my own case, I wouldn’t pronounce on the use of certain terms (such as 'blue dog democrat') in US conservative circles to the extent that I don’t know very much about them.

The only suggestion that I can make is that editors try and find a common format for all the epithets. via discussion on talk page, and stick to it rigorously. I would say that each one needs to have a description of the term without an assumption of the type of people who use it, and shying away from complicated descriptions of context and interpretation. Even if this means actually deleting most of the cites, it would be better than the amateur textual interpretations which currently comprise many of them. Either that, or each and every definition must be expanded to include context. I’m not sure exactly how to go about it, but consistency is what’s needed.

I have copied this message (following a bit of context) onto Liftarn’s talk page, and will try and think of something to put on the talk page of the article. As it currently stands, it is non-encyclopaedic, and a POV playground. Sorry if I don’t have too much time – I’m moving house at the moment. Get back to me with your thoughts, and maybe we could put detailed suggestions on the talk paage for the benefit of all editors. Thanks illWill 17:28, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Removing your Current events piece
I'm about to remove your piece on Current events. This is because it was already included on Wednesday. I'm going to keep your sources though. --Irishpunktom\talk 11:34, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Heathen
Liftarn, I can accept that we disagree over the semantic field of "Asatru". But you seem genuinely confused about terminology now. this wasn't such a great edit, see Talk:Germanic paganism. I have done my best to discuss terminology and etymology in detail, and if you disagree with my presentation of heathen in particular, you should cite evidence rather than 'being bold'. dab (&#5839;) 16:39, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Ford Cortina - Hyundai Stellar
Hej Liftarn! I saw ApolloBoy was removing your sentence: "In Canada it was fitted with a Mitsubishi engine and sold as Hyundai Stellar." from the Ford Cortina page, and that is maybe right, for the Stellar wasn't a Cortina. It was a different car, based on the Cortina (Fårrd Taunus) platform. Det är praktiskt att man kan köpa Taunus-spindelleder och sånt till bilen. Men i alla fall, det var kul att se att någon annan svensk kände till Stellar. Ha det gött! Hälsningar från ägaren av Sveriges enda Hyundai Stellar. --Boivie 05:32, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Volvo Cars
With regards to your comment, "Luxury, Get Real?" You seem to know nothing about automobiles. Volvo competes in the luxury sector of automobiles. When doing work on Wikipedia, I hope you would be a little less biased so readers are able to find the truth. Whether you believe Volvo to be a luxury car or not is irrelevant; work for Ford or an investment bank which analyzes the company and see the results they compile on whom Volvo's competitors are. User:64.12.116.201


 * Volvo competes with Audi, Mazda and several different marques. They have some upscale models that may be defined as luxury, but as a whole Volvo clearly isn't a luxury brand. The matter haver already been talked about at Talk:Volvo Cars. // Liftarn

Liftarn, I do not intend to be obnoxinous or to argue. I am an Financial Analyst by trade and cover the Automobile Industry. Volvo by fact is now a luxury automobile. I know some do not believe it or consider it but on record the cars compeititors are who I list when I revise the site. I hope you will help me maintain the accurate information on the Volvo Cars page. Thanks and have a great evening.


 * Du you have any sources to back up your claims? And remember the words of Carl Sagan, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.". Even Volvo themselves don't call their cars "luxury". And please go to Talk:Volvo Cars and state your case there. // Liftarn

Your signature
Hi, Liftarn. I've just been looking at the talk page for Historical persecution by Christians, and I see you've made some comments. This is just a small thing, but would you mind signing your posts with four tildes ( ~ ), not three, so that the date and time are displayed as well. That makes it easier to follow the talk, because I can tell if one comment was written before or after another one without having to go back and check the page history. Thanks. Ann Heneghan (talk) 11:25, 11 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'll try to remember that. // Liftarn 12:46, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

AA
Are you going to create the svenska article for America's Army? If your link was just an accident, it ought to be deleted. RememberMe 15:16, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Help with Translation!?
Can you help translate this for me to swedish? Many thanks in advance!

''The longest river (175 miles in Albania) is the Drin, which originates in the Kosovo region of Serbia. Other main rivers are the Seman, Shkumbin, and Vjosë, all of which drain the central part of the western plain. Albania also has many lakes, the most important of which are Lake Scutari (Liqeni i Shkodrës) in the northwest and Lakes Ohrid and Prespa along the eastern border.''

--Armour 10:24, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


 * It loks like User:Liimes already helped you with it. // Liftarn

Template:Saab automobiles
You're right - I was trying to keep it compact and ended up ruining the whole concept. I've changed it now so it's more sensible in terms of car size classes... Better? --SFoskett 03:04, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

ZX Interface 2
Thanks for the interesting contributions to ZX Interface 2. In particular I didn't realise the cartridges were limited to 16K. That really must have sucked! Richard W.M. Jones 16:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Jolly Roger


Hello you made an awesome jolly roger flag picture! Could you make it in SVG ? (Scalable Vector Graphics) Frap 19:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Already done (check commons). The SVG version looks wrong, but I blame that on that I used Open Office to make it. // Liftarn
 * It looks perfect in Inkscape. If you make it public domain then you can put it on http://www.openclipart.org/ Frap 01:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * But it looks too narrow on Wikipedia. // Liftarn

Hi, from GRuban
Hi Liftarn. Remember me? I guess I shouldn't be surprised to find so many ODP folks here, but it was still interesting. (As was the record of your war with NetEsq.) :-) Is there a complete list of ODP folks somewhere? GRuban 21:31, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually I do. I don't think there is, but perhaps create a userbox for it. Something like



or..? // Liftarn

Happy New Year
Regards, Arno 09:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Happy new year to you too. // Liftarn

User boxes
Check out an alternative way to set up userboxes at my presentation page

Axezz 17:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I have used it. // Liftarn

Michael Melchior
Regarding your recent addition to the article on Michael Melchior: It seems rather random and only vaguely relevant that his name is mentioned in an external link that lists a vast number of people as so-called self-hating Jews. In what way is this external opinion important to the article? //Big Adamsky 17:44, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Looking more closely at it, the quote is from Kaufman's blog. I think it would be mischaracterize him to attribute his quote to his current or past role within ZOA. --Leifern 17:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * My spontaneous reaction was simply that the Kaufman name-dropping is of peripheral relevance to this very short article stub. And it is merely one opinion, as expressed on one external web site. //Big Adamsky 17:55, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

As I wrote it's just some trivia. You could probably dig up more people who have called him that using Google. // Liftarn

Locost
G'Day Liftarn, The locost is a book chassis, locost seven built over 2 1/2 years. All the running gear, engine ,transmission, diff and brakes are from a corolla gts twincam, uprights are from a hyundai steller. Steering rack is MGB. Dash is carbon over wallboard, looks good though!. yahoo groups locost north america. email me if you want more info.

Cheers Stephen Flood, Vancouver Canada.


 * Thanks! I'll add the information. // Liftarn

Individualist anarchism and anarcho-capitalism
Thank you for your comments on Articles for deletion/Individualist anarchism and anarcho-capitalism. I have closed the debate as no consensus. Please note that this does not preclude further discussion of eventual disposition of the article, including keeping, merging, redirection, or a further nomination for deletion. Again, thank you for your comments. -- Jonel | Speak 03:25, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Stockholm metro line templates
Hi Liftarn. Can I propose a change to the Stockholm metro line templates to add a little more information? If someone doesn't know much about Stockholm or its metro and they visit, say, the Kungsträdgården article, they won't know what the box means without clicking on it. Perhaps the title bars could read something like "Stockholm metro stations: Blue line" instead of just "Blue line"? CLW


 * Consider it done. // Liftarn


 * Great! I'd have been bold and done it myself, but wanted to see what you thought first. I think they're much clearer now. CLW 09:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Re Murray Rothbard
Why is a citation needed? Intangible 19:32, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * It's a dubious claim. // Liftarn


 * But it said helped define not defined. Intangible 14:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, "according to Wendy McElroy helped define". Wendy McElroy is the source and "helped define" is the claim. I don't see the problem. // Liftarn
 * Actually i was refering to the situation before you put that citation tag there. Now it seems as if Rothbard's contributions to libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism were only recognized since when McElroy wrote that article. I cannot see how anyone could factually dispute Rothbard not helping define modern libertarianism (like Nozick and Rand) and anarcho-capitalism (like Friedman and Hoppe). Intangible 20:27, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


 * If you find more sources feel free to add them. No such sweeping claims are made for Robert Nozick nor Ayn Rand. // Liftarn

Category:Game programmers
Hi! Category:Game programmers is not ment to be used as a category for user pages. Cheers, —Ruud 13:09, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Dhimmi
The problem with your edits to Dhimmi is that you know in advance that dhimma was "an early form of freedom of religion", so you go out and find at dubious Internet sites some material that supports this view. Wikipedia is, of course, a place where everyone can edit, but we must use reliable sources, especially on subjects that could be politically volatile. If you are really interested in the subject, look at the references section: there are lots of good readings there. Go to your nearest bookstore or to Amazon.com and buy them. Read them, maybe they will challenge your established views? If that happens, you will not be the only in Wiki. It happened to many people. Me including. Pecher Talk 11:29, 18 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The problem with the article is that uses dubious Internet sites and/or books to support a very one eyed view. Sorry, but in the interest of presenting a fell view I will try to make the article more balanced. // Liftarn
 * $100 if you show me at least one Internet site cited by the article. Dubious books? Which one? Pecher Talk 14:03, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Several of the sites listed (for insstance and ) is little more than hate sites. Since none of the books are verifiable as sources (many lack ISBN numbers and none give page number or even chapter) they are almost useless. And as I've already stated, they provide a very one eyed view. // Liftarn

snow white and the madness of truth
Hi Liftarn,

I'm starting to get tired of re-editing the article. Can you explain the relevancy of the links or the source of the speculations? If not please stop reverting it. --Amnon 14:00, 18 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The relevance is obvious, they all have to do with art some people find horrible and want to destroy. Source is now given. // Liftarn

No, the relevance isn't obvious. Even according to your beloved journalist the Snow White incident was just a conspiracy by Israel to continue its genocide (or something like that), nothing to do with desire to destroy art. And you haven't even attempted to explain the Triumphalism link. Also, you've left the paragraph you edited in a complete mess, stylistically. Amnon 16:00, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

A Western Sahara-related vote
===>Here Make your voice heard. Vote or die. And all that. -Justin (koavf), talk 21:13, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

hitchhikers guide user box
haha, i like that one hitchhikers guide user box that you made, so im going to use it. ok? thanks. Moshpitttt 00:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Please do. // Liftarn

"Sistema" (Systema on the Discovery channel's "Go Warrior")
(taken from Talk:Sambo)

On Dicovery channel I saw an program about a form or russian self defence and combat that sounded very much like sambo, but it was called "sistema" (the system). Is it identical, variant of sambo or something else. It was claimed it was based on various traditional forms of unarmed combat. // Liftarn

The program is "Go Warrior", and it was primarily Ryabko's Systema (the work with Mikhail Ryabko and Vladimir Vasiliev) See Ryabko's Systema -- Sy / (talk) 16:38, 26 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info. Interesting. // Liftarn

3RR
Please take note that you have reached your 3 revert limit on Dhimmi. You may be blocked if you continue reverting. Pecher Talk 19:17, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


 * So have you. I'm attempting to merge all the information on your and Farhansher's versions into one version. Then we can perhaps sit down and work out the details. // Liftarn

RE: Clay Pigeon
Thanks for the picture of clay pigeons. --Think Fast 01:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

The first Combi Coupé
You wrote at Combi coupé: "Combi coupé is a type of automobile introduced by Saab. It's essentially a hatchback that is a cross between a comfortable family saloon and an estate car. The type was first introduced in the Saab 99".

Introduced by Saab?. And what about the Renault 16?.

Thank you.


 * As far as I can tell the R16 was never called "combi coupé". SAAB admits the R16 used a simmilar concept, but I don't know if the R16 can be said to have a "coupé-like profile". and "Nevertheless, Saab has always been linked with the distinctive sporty and multi-dynamic qualities embodied by the _combi-coupé_ foremat.". // Liftarn

real punk
Hello, I have noticed you use the punk-fan userbox. You may be also interested using, which look like this:

If you want to comment me, use my talk page please. p s  y  c  h  o  m  e  l  o    (  d  i  s  c  ussion)   20:58, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Assistance needed
'''Your assistance is needed in the discussion section of the Sweden Democrats article. Please read under the last heading in the discussion section. A member of the Sweden Democrats claims that some of the sources do not refer to the Sweden Democrats as "extreme right-wing" but merely "right-winged". He also makes other claims about how the sources translate into English. Since I can't read Swedish and this person has considerable bias, I need you to read the articles and verify/debunk his claims.''' WGee 06:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll try. I have given some links. Try to remind him to keep to facts. He seems to have a problem with this. // Liftarn

About SweHomer
He is wreaking havoc in the Sweden Democrats article. His edits are totally unnacceptable and I will delete his rants whenever possible. He is threatening the integrity, truthfulness, and reliability of this encyclopedia. I'm sure that is a criteria for banning or blocking, but I'll have to see. I have seen these political rants before on the Sweden Democrats page, and I now know that it was him. WGee 19:21, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Liftarn, I see that you are having problems working with this new editor. Simply taking out this editor's content over and over again doesn't work. Of course if you take it out, then the other editor will put it back in. Round and round it goes, and you have an edit war. I'm speaking from experience! Everyone makes these mistakes until they learn the better ways. We need to work with this editor so the content is put in the proper form. Remember, one of the most important rules on Wikipedia is assume good faith. You do not know his intentions. Could you back off and let me work with this editor. Let's see if we can get proper sources to verify the content, okay. It is not going to hurt anything if the article is a little of the mark as long as the content is not a copyright violation or libel. In the long run, if the material is not properly sourced it will take it out, okay?


 * Articles always turn out better when people with various pov work on them together. Everthing ends up being better sourced and more balanced pov. I'm sure that will be the case here. It takes a days or sometimes weeks to work it out. Also read WP:DR. Banning someone is not a first step in dispute resolution. : ) You need to ask other editors for help, get a third opinion, take a straw poll, or other ways to build consensus. Remember WP:AGF, ask for help from other editors to build consensus, and be patient. -- FloNight  talk [[Image:Small_shamrock.png|18px]] 13:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

We have tried to talk with him using th talk page. And it worked so-so. He called the other editors a lot of nasty things, but at least we had a discussion going. Then he obviously got tired of being asked for sources and wrote a long argumentative piece instead. // Liftarn

Sign talk page comments
Please sign talk page comments with four ~. This puts a your user name and date. thanks -- FloNight  talk  13:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Did I miss that. Sorry about that. // Liftarn

Respect FloNight advice Please
Again you are taking turns in reverting. Can you please stop this and restore text to the version FloNight put it in?

"Do not remove or re-insert text without discussion leading to consensus. You have been asked nicely by myself and Mel."

I put this in the "talk" page of everyone, so there can me no further accidents. These to reverts were of course not done on purpose, you both just missed to read what Flonight wrote.SweHomer 11:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, please do not remove text. // Liftarn

Categorization discussions
Hi Liftarn. I wanted to remind you that while Categorization naming discussions can begin on talk pages of the categories themselves (or wherever), the actual renaming and moving of articles should be handled only on WP:CFD. Because you depopulated the Nobel Prize in Economics winners category prior to the discussion, now someone has to go and move all those articles back in light of the consensus to not rename. --Syrthiss 15:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I wasn't aware that you could rename categories. Sorry about that. // Liftarn


 * You can't, thats kind of the problem. To rename a category we actually have to create a new category with the new name and then migrate all of the articles in the category over to the new one. :) --Syrthiss 18:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

A little favour
Hey, could you look out at the socialism article every so often? User:Sam Spade keeps reverting back to his own version without attempting discussion, and he's the only one who has a problem with the version that's currently on the page. If you see him doing it again, could you please point this out to him? Thanks. -- infinity  0  23:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok, I have it in my watchlist so I'll have a look every now and then. // Liftarn 09:56, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Do NOT tag the sources of derivative images with redundant
You tagged Image:Piratey.jpg with the redundant tag, stating it was redundant to it's vectorized version. This is WRONG. While it certainly is true that future uses of the image should probably use the vectorized version, the original image is in no way redundant. In fact, we need to keep the original image around for legal licensing purposes. If we delete the original image, then we lose the proof that it was relased under a free license (or into the public domain, in this case), which then makes the derivative, verctorized version illegal and unlicensed. That would be a Bad Thing. Do NOT tag the sources of derivative images with redundant. Thanks for your other work on Wikipedia, and please don't take this as an attack. It's just really important, is all. JesseW, the juggling janitor 02:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Is it really necessary to keep the sources if they are truly redundant? Anyway, I've tagged it with instead. // Liftarn

Good Joke !!
Hello i'm an user of french wikipedia. I have put your joke on my page. Thank you !

InterWikiLink-Checker
Hi! I have (hopefully) answered your question here. Cheers, --InterwikiLinksRule 10:54, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks! // Liftarn

Sonett IV proposed merger
Hi - I hope I have interpreted the article history correctly, in assuming that you proposed the merger of the above article with Saab Sonett. Any further ideas? It doesn't seem to have captured anyone else's imagination! I would be please to hear from you. Tack så mycket. Please reply to User talk:Ballista - :) Ballista 18:04, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, the IV article just duplicated what's alsready in the Sonett article. // Liftarn

I agree fully with you on this - what's the next move? - Ballista 15:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Saab 60
Hi - thanks for enquiry & interest. However, I don't have sources, unless I can find an original sheet of paper done by a friend who used to work in the place where they were made. I am not at home at the moment, but I will try to find something, when I am home. I have, of course, seen the car. - Ballista 15:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)


 * It's always good to have sources to be able to verify the article. Somebody at the Swedish Saab Club thought it was a late april fools joke when I wrote about the car there. But there are some odd specials like the Saab 900 Enduro in Australia. // Liftarn

On a different subject, you have saved me a lot of work putting my images on the Commons - I had contemplated doing so and had already put ther old Morris 10/4 picture there. However, I am a slow worker, so had not put time aside to do the rest. As a matter of interest, why did you decide to do that work? All the best - Ballista 15:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I often move pictures over to commons. I edit both English and Swedish Wikipedia so it's best to have the pictures there where I can use them on both Wikipedias. // Liftarn

Citing non-credible sources
Please do not restore statements sourced by noncredible sources (as you did in Anarchism and anarcho-capitalism). Wikipedia policy (Wikipedia:Reliable_sources) says: "A personal website (either operated by one individual or a group of individuals) or blog may be used only as a primary source, i.e., when we are writing about the owner of the website or the website itself. But even then we should proceed with great caution and should avoid relying on information from the website as a sole source. This is particularly true when the subject is controversial, and the self-publisher has no professional or academic standing. WP:V says: "Self-published sources... may be used only as sources of information on themselves, and only in articles about them. For example, the Stormfront website may be used as a source of information on itself in an article about Stormfront, so long as the information is notable, not unduly self-aggrandizing, and not contradicted by reliable, third-party published sources. Self-published sources may never be used as sources of information on another person or topic." Please help to make Wikipedia content more verifiable by only citing credible sources. RJII 03:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The (A) FAQ is a credible source. // Liftarn


 * It's a self-published source (and written by people with no apparent qualifications). According to the policy above, a self-published source can only be used in an article about the FAQ itself (the An Anarchist FAQ article). It's not a credible secondary source for Wikipedia articles. RJII 14:55, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

That is your opinion. You are ofcourse entitled to an opinion even if it's wrong, but please don't interrupt Wikipedia with your ideas. // Liftarn


 * It's not "my opinion." It's official Wikipedia policy. Please obey the policy or risk action being taken against you. RJII 15:40, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

It certainly is your opinion and threats is not very nice. Please read Civility that is official policy. // Liftarn


 * We have procedures to help enforce Wikipedia policy. If you want to call me telling you that you're risking having official actions taken against you for violating the policy a threat, fine. But, there is nothing uncivil about it. If you continue to put the noncredible source in and the statements it attempts to corroborate then we'll have to take this to mediation. RJII 15:53, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Correction: A source you consider a self-published, noncredible source. It's thus your opinion about the (A) FAQ. // Liftarn


 * Prove that it's published anywhere. It's produced and displayed on a Geocities.com website, then circulated around. No one has published it. RJII 20:10, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

It's widley published on a lot of other sites. As far as I know it's not yet published on paper. // Liftarn


 * Other sites posting it, doesn't constitute publishing. I see you reverted again, this time with the following explanation: "Credible, peer revieved on-line sources are OK". The An Anarchist FAQ is not peer-reviewed. RJII 01:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually it is. // Liftarn

Pentacle
If you can recall where you saw the pentacle as a symbol of Christ, please let me know. patsw 18:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll see if I can find it. I found the text "Christians once commonly used the pentagram to represent the five wounds of Jesus" in the pentagram article. Also from Symbols and symbolism in Christian demonology "The pentagram, which was at one stage a Christian symbol denoting the five wounds of Christ". After doing som googling I also found "There are many connections between the pentagram and Christianity. Before the cross, it was a preferred emblem to adorn the jewelry and amulets of early Christians (followed by an 'x' or a phoenix). The pentagram was associated with the five wounds of Christ" // Liftarn

Hallå
Är du Svensk? (Deng 21:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC))


 * Ganska... // Liftarn

Userboxes: A New Proposal
Hey, I've noticed that you've been active on the Userbox deletion page, either strongly FOR or AGAINST the use of the new T2 for deleting userboxes. I have noticed that most of the community is strong in their opinions on this issue; for that reason, I created my own proposal which attempts to create a middle ground for the two groups, and finally get this debate settled once and for all. I welcome your input into the proposal, as well as your (non-binding) vote on the straw poll. Thanks! // The  True  Sora  01:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Trallpunk
Sorry, I haven't had time to look into this. I found the comparison here, but after reading it twice, it looks like a mistake by someone unfamiliar with the genres. I will get back to you later on. Thanks a lot!--Asterion talk to me 12:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Category:Anti-Semitic people
You don't seem to be new to Wikipedia, but in case you haven't been told this befor. When editing you have to maintain neutral (see WP:NPOV) and you have to provide sources. In the article Mahmoud Ahmadinejad you have repetedly inserted Category:Anti-Semitic people without giving any sources for why it should be inclued. There is a subject about it on the talk page of the article (Talk:Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad). Please make give your reasons there. Thanks. // Liftarn
 * When placing articles in a category, we apply definitions. According to Anti-Semitism article, anti-semitism is "is hostility toward or prejudice against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group" Denial of Holocaust, especially in combination with threats to "wipe Israel off the map" is generally considered an act of hostility towards Jews. We seldom, if ever, use sources when placing an article in a category.


 * When speaking of sources, please remember that radical press such as Stockholms Fria Tidning is considered a bad source on Wikipedia. Please stop using it. On the same edit, please use more representative edit summaries. You summarized your edit with "Revert blanking", while you also added text referenced to the mentioned radical magazine. Please don't do that again.


 * I also have to note that I added this category to the article exactly once, while you claim that I "repetedly inserted" it.


 * H eptor  talk 15:30, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not deny the Holocaust, merely dubted it and he never made any statements about wiping Israel of the map so is does not apply. No sources necessary fo placing a person in a category? If I would ignore WP:POINT I could have a lot of fun... Like adding Category:American fascists to Dick Cheney ;-) No, as you understand sources are necessary. Calling SFT a "radical magazine" shows that you are either biased or uninformed. Following WP:AGF I assume the latter. "Revert blanking" was a correct description since what I did was to revert a blanking. Sorry that I incorrectly claimed you added the category more than once. // Liftarn


 * Here is BBC on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denying Holocaust:.
 * Fascism mainly refers to a particular political movement in Italy. According to OED, "fascism" is simply a depreciative. While not claiming being an expert on fascism, I see no way you can apply this definition on Dick Cheney.
 * I note that you call me "either biased or uninformed" (and then asking me to read WP:AGF), but since you ask, I think the opposite is the case. Stockholms Fria Tidning is a paper published as a reaction to what they obviously consider misrepresentative reporting by the mainstream media. Sounds pretty radical to me; the fact that they print about 5-10000 copies suggest that they are a marginal organization. The fact that it is only available in Swedish further contributes to its uselessness a source for Wikipedia.
 * In that edit you made a revert of my edit, while claiming it was merely a "Revert blanking".
 * H eptor  talk 16:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I checked the BBC page and the translation of the quotes are in question and even if they weren't the article does not say he is an anti-Semite. Drawing that conclusion would be original research. If no source is necessary on the other hand I could add whatever category I want to Dick Cheney. SFT was founed as a response to "similarity of reporting and concentration of ownership". OK, that may be a radical idea (No, not really), but that doesn't make the newspaper itself "radical". The number of copies is on the low side, but it's a local newspaper so that's not remarkable. That it's only available in Swedish is a drawback, but in lack of other sources it's OK (note: such has later been found). // Liftarn


 * What are you talking about? You just wrote above that "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not deny the Holocaust". You were presented with a more than credible source that he did. In any case, this debate about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's anti-semitism should be on the article's talk page, where the other editors you reverted may participate. On Stockholms Fria Tidning, just read Reliable_sources. In short, mainstream media with resources for fact-checking is always a prefered source for Wikipedia. Present the other sources you have found, but please do it on the article's talk page. -- H eptor  talk 18:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Nowhere in that article ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4616336.stm ) it says "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is an anti-Semite" or anything like it. The source does not back up your claim. // Liftarn


 * I claimed this article says that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has denied the Holocaust, which is what the article says. I made no other claims regarding this article. -- H eptor  talk 18:42, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

You are refering to "They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets.". Yes, that can be interpreted as he's saying that the Holocaust is a myth. However, drawing such a conclusion qould be WP:OR. Anyway, please continue at Talk:Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad // Liftarn


 * Could you possibly be serious? 1. He called it the massacre of Jews. Even though there have been other massacres of Jews, Holocaust stand out quite distinctly. 2. BBC itself labeled the section "THE HOLOCAUST". -- H</b> eptor  talk 19:22, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


 * And? // Liftarn

I get enough insults; I don't need to seek out another where none was intended. Tom Harrison Talk 18:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Palestinian Islamic Jihad
palestinian islamic jihad - how are they not a terrorist organization again? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.140.115 (talk • contribs)


 * I'm not saying they aren't, but "terrorist" is a very controversial term so what we do is saying that they are called terrorists by whoever is calling them that. // Liftarn

3RR
One more revert and you will be 3RR...Go ahead make my day ! SirIsaacBrock 09:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


 * You wish! I'll be back... In the mean time, please use Talk:Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad to motivate your POV edit. // Liftarn

No date info when you sign only with
As a courtesy for other editors, kindly observe Wikipedia guidelines and sign your talk page and user talk page posts. To do so simply add four tildes ( ~ ) at the end of your comments and your user name or IP address and the date will be automatically added. For further info see: Talk page guidelines. Thanks. Netscott 16:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I intentionally only use three, because I don't like the way the time looks. // Liftarn (sorry Liftarn 17:02, 1 June 2006 (UTC))
 * Ah, got ya... well that's understandable... are you aware that you can customize how the time is printed out on your signature (to make it how you like)? Netscott 17:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I think I saw somthing about that, but didn't have time to dig into it at the momeny. Do you have the link? // Liftarn 18:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Block and unblock
I've now unblocked you, see this discussion. --bainer (talk) 01:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. That was so quick I didn't even notice that I was blocked. // Liftarn 15:41, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Checkuser complete
You made a request for a Checkuser to be run, which has now been completed. See Requests for CheckUser for the results. the wub "?!"  22:23, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:1K ZX Chess - Sinclair - ZX81.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1K ZX Chess - Sinclair - ZX81.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images 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. Vic Vipr 12:28, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * As it says on the box: "Cover of Artic Computing's 1K ZX Chess." // Liftarn 17:30, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

War Criminals?
Ariel Sharon popped up on my watchlist and I noticed that you added him to Category:War criminals. Your doing that is rather subjective and reaks of original research that is sooner nonsense. That category is primarily for convicted war criminals (ie: Julius Streicher) would you kindly self-revert rather than force others to have to do so? Thanks. Netscott 15:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


 * As it says "convicted of or charged with war crimes" so no conviction is necessary. There are actually subcats for those who are convicted. // Liftarn
 * Ah I understand. I've just changed the wording of that category. One is not a default "criminal" for having merely been charged. This is due to the existence of the principal "innocent until proven guilty". Netscott 16:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * You might start the category Category:People charged with war crimes. Netscott 16:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I see where the confusion arose. In that category there was a subcat referencing "people charged". The wording wasn't clear on the cat. Netscott 16:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Any individual included in that new cat had better have reference material related to their charges and they had better be from notable criminal courts. Netscott 16:18, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

People keep removing the Cat from the Ariel Sharon page, even though it is explicitly cited. Thats annoying you know! --Irishpunktom\talk 17:28, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

WP:AWB
Just suggesting you use WP:AWB. Computerjoe 's talk 17:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll certainly look into it. // Liftarn

Anti-Arabism
Although the poll results that you added to the anti-Arabism article is useful information, it is more pertinent to the Islamphobia article. But, the article is right now protected, so when it becomes unprotected you can add that information to it. --Inahet 22:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * It's probably useful for both (it says "from muslim countries" not "by Muslims"), but I'll try to remember to add it. // Liftarn

Pointless reverts
Please stop reverting pointless messages which serve as only spam and clutter, specifically on talk:Ariel Sharon --206.181.226.34 14:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Please stop blanking things from talk pages. It's a bog no-no. // Liftarn
 * A core tenet of wikipedia is that it is user edited. If I, being the user, am unable to remove it then who will?--206.181.226.34 15:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Nice try! The comment was added by Adam Carr, not 206.181.226.34. // Liftarn
 * I don't mean that I added the comment. I mean that I, as a user of Wikipedia--the encyclopedia that anyone can edit--have just as much of a right to remove that pointless comment as any other person. And if I don't, as you assert, then who praytell does have such authority?--206.181.226.34 17:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Not from talk pages you don't (with very few exceptions). // Liftarn

Re: Gun
As I understand Wikipedia rules on verification, you should have a source or two verifying the deriviation of the name and verifying that the people named Gun who don't have a Wiki article about them actually exist. --M @ r ē ino 20:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * LOL, just what I needed, a photo of Gun Hellsvik. I removed the maintenance tag; the article is now quite well sourced.  Thanks! --M @ r ē ino 22:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

This edit
- why did you do that ? Zeq 12:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Because there was no way people could agree on if his statements was about the state of Israel of the leadership of Israel. The best compromise I could think of was to cut it entierly. // Liftarn


 * It is pointless at best. many would see it this a dishonest edit. It is clear his words on israel are some of the most controversial issues he is involved with. Please self revert. Zeq 15:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't Remove Posts
Removing other people's posts from talk pages is against the rules, you can be blocked for that action. List of marijuana slang terms 10:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * No, it's actually even in a Wikipedia guideline. See Remove personal attacks. // Liftarn


 * They were not personal attacks, they are based on the facts as you stated them and you know it ! List of marijuana slang terms 13:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * They were obvious personal attacks and if you don't agree with me you are an anti-Swede racist. ;-) // Liftarn

Help requested
On Category_talk:Anti-Semitic_people, user Porky Pig has removed the section including the various disputed allegations of anti-semitism which were divided into sub-sections by individual. Despite the discussion being quite recent he portrayed this as "archiving". Now he has switched tactics and claims the discussions should be had on the various talk pages. Very well. I will divide them up and move them to the various subjects' talk pages for discussion there. That's not what I'm posting here for.

I am attempting to open a debate on the category's talk page about objective standards for inclusion. I voted for the category's deletion previously, on the grounds that there were no such standards. Per WP:V and WP:LIVING, I am very concerned about the notion (expressed by various editors) that all such categorizations should be discussed only at their respective talk pages. To me, this would obviously lead to inconsistent standards of inclusion and inevitable unequal treatment of various subjects. What is needed is a single central standard for inclusion in the category, which should be debated at the category's talk page and when decided, posted on the main category page as a guideline to all editors.

Would you be interested in commenting at the category's talk page and providing some suggestions on what such objective standards should be? I ask because you seem to display an interest, which is better than the apathy displayed by many other editors on this topic. I have no love for anti-semites, but it disturbs me that few Wikipedians seem to have the sense of principle to stand up for equal treatment when that equal treatment would extend to those they disagree with. Are you willing to do so? Cheers, Kasreyn 17:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Porky Pig's RfI involving you
Hello again. You might be interested to know that Porky Pig has put in a Request for Investigation regarding what he calls your "vandalism". (see here.) Thus far it would appear it is not meeting with much success, as one editor has dismissed it as a matter for Dispute Resolution rather than RfI.

I just thought someone ought to inform you, since Porky Pig did not. Kasreyn 22:30, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I have been away for a while, but it looks like mr Pig managed to get blocked indefinitely. // Liftarn

cat:antisemitic people
please don't use WP as a soap-box. Anti-zionism, controversial opinions != anti-semitism. Please stop populating that awful category ASAP. - CrazyRussian talk/email 17:38, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * That seems to be the inclusion criteria used, if we have a source calling the person an anti-Semite he/she goes into the category. According to Mantanmoreland in Category talk:Anti-Semitic people we don't even need a source. Feel free to join the discussion at Category talk:Anti-Semitic people if you have any ideas. // Liftarn
 * If Mantanmoreland does indeed assert no source is needed, he is sadly mistaken. Please stop adding this cat without discussion and without sources, your spamming this cat is becoming disruptive. KillerChihuahua?!? 19:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * That's what he says: "If the editors in the underlying pages agree the person belongs in the category, then he belongs in the category." // Liftarn
 * He is wrong. Please read the policies, specifically WP:V KillerChihuahua?!? 19:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * He seems to say that that doesn't apply to categories only article content. // Liftarn
 * I reiterate the requests made by CrazyRussian and KillerChihuahua: stop spamming the anti-Semitism category. (Are you aware, incidentally, that some of the individuals whom you classify as anti-Semitic are actually Jewish sons of Holocaust survivors?) Sir Paul 06:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Does that matter? // Liftarn
 * Then would you do us all a favor, KC, and tell Mantanmoreland he's wrong yourself? Because he's not listening to me when I tell him he's wrong.  Kasreyn 06:34, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * He's not listening to me either. // Liftarn

Al-Aqsa Intifada
If those kids are so innocent what were thay doing throwing rocks at israeli forces? And please tell me how during one second can you identify a difference between a black granede and a black stone being thrown at you. After hours and hours of such "incidents" the israeli soldiers can get pretty stressed, so it would be a good idea not to throw stones at them. Also while the kids are just "harmlessly" throwing rocks at Israeli positions ditracting them, militants might at the same time target those positions with deadly RPGs. Try taking the Israelis side for a change. Mieciu K 09:57, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Do you have any source for that? In Wikipedia you need a verifiable source to back up a claim. As for taking sides I do have a tendency to support the underdog, but I don't think there is a problem considering the massive pro-Israel bias expressed by many Wikipedia editors, but that's not surprising giving the demographics of Wikipedia editors. Most come from the US and are spoon fed propaganda on TV all the time. // Liftarn


 * To prove what? That some of the palestinian kids throw rocks before they get shot? That israeli soldiers can get stressed? I didn't say that the palestinian militants use kids during RPG atttacks, they might use them, an such a possibility is enough to stress the Israeli soldiers. I am not challenging the miserable fate of the Palestinian people but after living in India for a while and getting to know the story of Mahatma Gandhi I have little respect for people that use inefective violence that hurts civilians on both sides, Isreal is a democratic country and you can fight a democratic country using non violence means. If Hamas activists would not carry weapons would Israel still bomb them, I don't think so. And I see the exact opposite reaction in that media: people buy the romantic "david vs golliat" story and support the "freedom fighters" a lot more than they deserve. Mieciu K


 * Yes, if it would go into the article the claim needs a verifiable and reliable source. As for democracy, the people who get shot generally does not have the right to vote in Israeli elections so that wouldn't work. For non-violence to work you need an opponent with a stong sense of fair play and an international audience. Those factors are missing here. // Liftarn


 * They don't have voting rights but they still have human rights and they could execise them if only Israel could no longer say it has to limit human rights due to threts to it's citizens and soldiers. The IDF usually (but not always) admits to making mistakes when civilians unintentionaly die due to its actions. I have rarly heard the other side admitting to mistakes. And there are a lot of TV crews in the middle east, a lot of those should be in Chechnya, Darfur and other places instead, where there is nobody to cover war crimes commited on a daily basis, while almost daily we can hear allegations of war crimes commited by the Israelis, no wonder that after over 50 years of the conflict the TV audience is bored. Mieciu K 11:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Whatever... Interesting discussion, but I don't really have time for it now. // Liftarn


 * Neither do I :) Take care Mieciu K 12:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

is inaccessible: 100px. I think it should be reuploaded under a different name so that it's not shadowed by a Wikipedia image. Conscious 15:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Apple //c Image Tagging
I'm a bit confused...why did you tag a bunch of images, for example, Image:Apple IIc.jpg, for deletion due to no source/copyright info if there are comments by the uploader stating the source website and that he believes the copyright allows use on Wikipedia? DMacks 09:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Two questions & greetings
Hello again - I have two questions for you:
 * 1) You kindly uploaded some of my images to Commons. That was fine but I only recently found that they also 'disappeared' off the English Wikipedia. I wonder if you could let me know what process you used, for my 'learning curve'. I want to put other images up on Commons but don't want to lose them from the English WP. How do I do it, without going through the laborious process of uploading them again, de novo, onto Commons?
 * 2) I can't find anything on air-conditioning or climate control, on English WP. Am I missing something?
 * 3) Not a question: I've uploaded some more images (mostly Saab!) onto a sub-page: User:Ballista/Images/Vehicle components, in case you're interested. Please feel free to upload to Commons, if you wish but please don't remove them from English WP!
 * 4) Greetings and best wishes from the UK and from me - Ballista 09:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


 * 1. I used to do it manually, but now I'm using http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/commonshelper.php (with a bit of manual work put into it). I download the image and then have to upload it again, but the assistant helps with categories and such. Then I tag the image on English Wikipedia with . Images tagged as available from commons may get deleted since they are accessable from any Wikpedia project anyway.
 * 2. Air conditioning?
 * 3. I'll have a lok at it. Thanks for the tip.
 * // Liftarn
 * Air conditioning? Yes, but not cars. I see you are uploading pictures to Commons - well done & thanks - Ballista 15:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Audrey Landers.jpg
You added the pui tag here, without any comment. That tag has the bolded heading: This file has been listed on Possibly unfree images, because it is missing information on its source or copyright status. Every single point in that sentence is false. So I am going to remove that tag from that image. Please be more careful. AnonEMouse (squeak) 14:23, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) It hasn't been listed on Possibly unfree images (which is why I'm writing here and not there - don't you think you should actually list it there if you put that tag on it?)
 * 2) It is not missing information on its source (it gives the source, "from http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com/CZAM.HTM ")
 * 3) It is not missing information on copyright status (it gives the copyright status, "usage info at http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com/author.htm#PICS "; which status is "You may use any of the pictures in The Probert Encyclopaedia in your own projects.")


 * I have seen scores of pictures incorrectly tagged with NoRightsReserved, often with no source at all, but also with just giving a link to the web page where the picture was found. So please, in the future both give the source and in what way they picture is free to use. In this case I also dubt that the picture is theirs to give away, but I can't really bother about that now. // Liftarn

By the way, your "practical joke", the "You have new messages (diff)." at the top of your talk page, is in bad taste. AnonEMouse (squeak) 14:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I second the second point. Joke was a little funny first time I saw it (some place else), but you've had it for many months now. -- <b style="color:#000040;">H</b> eptor  talk 16:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * You are both entitled to your opinion. // Liftarn

Image tagging
When you tag images for PUI, please notify the uploader on their talk page. It's a requirement. SchmuckyTheCat 19:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Isn't there some way to automate that process? // Liftarn

Image
There is a copyright status on the picture. It's in green! It sayd it's copyrighted, but can be used for other purposes. Tcatron565 15:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I said that the copyright status is in green. It's status is NoRights Reserved or, This image is copyrighted. However, the copyright holder has irrevocably released all rights to it, allowing it to be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, used, modified, built upon, or otherwise exploited in any way by anyone for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, with or without attribution of the author, as if in the public domain.


 * That's not what the source site says. // Liftarn
 * Then what does it say?! Tcatron565 20:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The site says: "Copying or storing of any Content for other than personal use is expressly prohibited without prior written permission from VNU." // Liftarn 07:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)