User talk:Oleryhlolsson

Discussion at Talk:Jacob Barnett
Oleryholsson, welcome to Wikipedia. I have dropped you a comment at Talk:Jacob Barnett, and I would appreciate it if you could give it your attention. Thanks, Sławomir Biały  (talk) 21:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I see our correspondences must have crossed paths. Cheers and happy editing!  Sławomir Biały  (talk) 21:09, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, do you have a reference that Edwards had not met Jacob? If not, it is not really appropriate to say this.  The cited reference says that his analysis is based on the book, not that he hadn't met Jacob, so the article now reflects that.  I'm open to a different way of expressing this, but to say that he "hadn't met Jacob" strikes me as argumentative, and not strictly in compliance with some of our editorial policies (WP:NOR and WP:NPOV).  If there were a published criticism of Edwards' review that points this out, then we could cite that.  So for now I've left a sentence at the end of that paragraph for you to find a citation.  If none can be found, then it should probably be removed.   Sławomir Biały  (talk) 12:14, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Look at talk page for Jacob Barnett for my latest changes (deletions). Oleryhlolsson (talk) 13:17, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2016
Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Sławomir Biały (talk) 13:38, 29 November 2016 (UTC)


 * As another editor involved in this, it is my opinion that OHL has been restoring well sourced information that had been stable for two years. Warnings that mention defamation are quite out of order here, the disputed material was positive. By repeatedly deleting long established material without consensus, SB has been edit warring, which I have been mindful to report at WP:BLPN. Having initiated and lost two AfD nominations, SB decided to take the matter into his own hands and delete the majority of the article himself without obtaining any consensus so to do. Still, there has been some compromise, most of the deleted material is now back in the article. Viewfinder (talk) 14:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Edits to Template:Germanic languages and Template:Germanic philology

 * Information.svg Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.
 * [[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you.

You have been told by myself and that Gutnish is considered a dialect, yet you have continued to add WP:OR and it has lead to disruptive editing. Please stop now. R9tgokunks  ✡  20:23, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. R9tgokunks  ✡  05:53, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

February 2019
Hello, I'm DerbyCountyinNZ. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jeanne Calment have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 21:20, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Belligerency
May I ask why you are acting so belligerently? Surtsicna (talk) 19:31, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * My I ask, why you are performing this kind of 'vandalism'.?Oleryhlolsson (talk) 19:34, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Kindly do not call me a vandal. Why are you reinserting information that is demonstratively false (or at the very least not relevant to the topic)? Surtsicna (talk) 19:50, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Why in Gods name have you been around for teen years and then suddenly 6 days ago begins to erase information that users throughout many, many years have spend time on adding to this encyclopedia, and depriving the users the greater overlook. Royal ancestry and the way royal intermarriages is treated throughout history is often a complicated matter or a matter of many different considerations. It's NOT helpfull to the users of this encyclopedia to follow these bonds between the families and nations if we are unnecessary restrictive on how much information we allow the users to see/know. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 19:58, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * No, it did not take many years nor many users to copy-paste that info across articles. A couple of determined users did it on their own without any prior discussion. There was an immediate opposition to this chart, e.g. Talk:Louis V of France. A lot of users want these ahnentafels gone entirely and cite the irrelevance of the people listed in such charts. I am advocating a middle way. By removing just one generation, the chart no longer looks overcrowded with extraneous information. It no longer looks like a bunch of trivia. That means that it is easier to keep in the article. We can include 6 generations into the template, but we are smart enough not to. We should be smart enough not to include the fifth one either. Otherwise there are legitimate concerns about the pertinence of the chart. Surtsicna (talk) 20:08, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It's getting late here in Denmark, so I don't have that much more time today, and at the moment I'm not sure about my weekend. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 20:35, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, you must be an early bird. We are in the same time zone and the night is still very young to me. Cheers! Surtsicna (talk) 20:40, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, my problem is, that I don't have internet at home - only at work or in library. And it's far overdue for me to leave my work now..... Oleryhlolsson (talk) 20:45, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of current monarchies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Law of succession ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/List_of_current_monarchies check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/List_of_current_monarchies?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

About our fellow editors in the discussion
Apparently some of our fellow editors are suspecting you (or me?) of being a "sock puppet". Considering I've never edited the same articles or talk pages with you before the last few weeks, it's clearly an unreasonable supposition. I can only hope the editors are not acting deliberately in bad faith, or contemplating some kind of gaming or other abuse. Mnd5trm (talk) 14:35, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, living in Denmark I perhaps tend to look at myself as being somewhat out of the "main routes" of interests and arguments - even though I don't count my own arguments of lesser value than those of others. :-) Oleryhlolsson (talk) 14:41, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

August 2020
It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. The problematic edits in question are . JBL (talk) 11:34, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * JBL, Oleryhlolsson is not the only one. BabbaQ has also been at it, even off this project. Surtsicna (talk) 11:50, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Never heard of the expression 'canvassing' before - but duly noted. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 12:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks
Hello, Thanks for your nice works in royalty related articles on Wiki. Your are one of best editor I have seen. You know, I've been editing wiki for over 7 years. I'm really tired now. Wikipedia is sometimes unfair, especially on AfD because of admin bias. 103.200.134.151 (talk) 23:19, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with Vä
Hi, thanks for the help with pointing me to some really good sources regarding Vä Church. The article can probably still be polished quite a bit, so please of course feel free to do so or let me know if you have any thoughts or comments. I've nominated it for GA status as well, I think it's important enough to deserve it. By the way, as a Scanian by birth I'm also not surprised to see some of the best stuff written about it is from Danish sources... Best regards, Yakikaki (talk) 18:08, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Indeed an interesting church (by the way, my great-grandfater was from Scania as well). I could imagine, that at some point it would be a good idea to look into, what the German source more precicely has to say about the church: Scheel, Roland: "Skandinavien und Byzanz. Beding-ungen und Konsequenzen mittelalterlicher Kultur-beziehungen, Teil 1 & 2", Frankfurt am Main, 2015. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 18:15, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Royalty notability
Greetings...you have a very good understanding of Wiki policies and have also voted at Afd's for many Royalty related articles. I would appreciate if you could provide your opinion at Articles for deletion/Tripura Sundari Ammani. Sunshine1191 (talk) 01:58, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the message and your trust that I might possibly could contribute with something relevant to this discussion. I've been very busy for the last weeks in my private life to have time to look closer into this, but now I found a little time to have a look at Tripura Sundari Ammani, and I've added a number of sources (10) to the article, so from this my conclussion would be keep, but if some unsourced statements in the article needs to be removed, then I would leave this part to other users to deal with. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 18:58, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Poul Schlüter
Well the source title is Da ambassadøren måtte råbe ad USA: »Hm, det var ikke helt oppe i ’fuck’, vel. Men det var noget i retning af: ’Hvad fanden tænker I på?« but as per MOS:CURLY we are suppose to use straight quotes (') instead of the curly ones (’). The script I ran actually did that. Unless of course those curly are correct as per the language. I would like to get enlightened about that - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
 * In Danish newspapers the "curly" ones are very often used - I don't know the reason. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 13:28, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

About your contributions (5 April 2021) for the article "Battle of Fýrisvellir" : Where are the sources for this new sensational information?
Where are the sources for this new sensational information:

"A few months after the death of Harald Bluetooth, he met with the Scanian king Tóki, who agreed to help, saying that he wanted to execute Eric as a traitor and slit his throat. Tóki assembled 17 ships from Zealand under command of Sibbi the Good, and 13 ships with his own men from Scania. The arrangement was that Styrbjörn, when placed on the throne in Uppsala, would become a tributary to king Tóki."

Where can one read about this completely astonishing information, which connects Styrbjörn with Toke Gormsson (from The Hällestad Runestones) and Sibbe the Wise/the Good (from the Karlevi Runestone)?

Where have you read it? Where can I read it?

Hello
Hi Greetings...Long time no see. I hope you're doing well. You have a very good knowledge of Monarchy political system. I would appreciate if you could provide your opinion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility/Archive 9. Thanks VocalIndia (talk) 06:01, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

July 2021
Hello! You ignored my edit summary here, which was "please provide a source for that!" - and proceeded to revert anyway. Looks very bad. I will not edit war today but will remove that again in a day or two, unless you provide your source in the article text. Your proclamations are not enough when it comes to changing the locations of graves and gravestones. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you blind? There is a perfectly correct source attached to the text. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 12:35, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * No I am not blind but at times a bit too rushed & I apologize sincerely. All I saw was that you reverted. Missed the fact that you then also provided a source, which became "perfectly correct" a little later when you added the page number. When you henceforth make this kind of changes to article text/captions, will you provide sources right away? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:05, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Tall el-Hammam
Hi, I would think that something such as an admission by the author to facilitating looting of this archaeological site is absolutely relevant. Archaeologists would probably like to know. It also goes towards the unethical publication and framing of the research at the site. Would you consider reverting the edit, and we can discuss on the article's talk page? Qt.petrovich (talk) 18:56, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
 * If we should discuss in the articles every single archaeological site, where there is "an abundance" of findings that someone take a piece or two for there own collection, I think we would have a realy, realy tuff time. I still fail to see the encyclopedic relevance of this, and furthermore I don't realy get it whether you think this information is relevant in connection with the person in question (Steven Collins), if so I would say it was added to the wrong article, or if you honestly think this is something worth mentioning in respect to Tall el-Hammam? Then my reply would still be that given all the things that this article dosen't mention about the site and the excavations I would have to say that this is probably the strangest (and most irrelevant?) detail I have seen added to an article in a long time. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 19:12, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

My apologies
Sorry, I somehow assumed you were talking about the Albert Fish guy.49.178.138.113 (talk) 12:15, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Palle Tillisch
Rather than just reverting my edit, may I suggest that you instead add something to the Palle Tillisch bio? However brief it may be is irrelevant. It having a source is the important bit. And if the death dates don’t quite match, we can investigate that once we have your source.  Schwede 66  23:27, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * As long as I'm not sitting by my computer but only have my phone turned on, then I tend a more strict choise in where and how I edit Wikipedia, since I find using my phone comes with serious limitations. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 23:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * And no obvious need for correcting the date of death in the article about Palle Tillisch since it seem to be correct. It's the Danish Folketing that has a wrong date on their website, perhaps they read a newspaper from the 17th of December 1994, and reported the date of the article, as the date of death by some kind of mistanke? But I can check the correct date of death next time I come to work (sometimes within the next three days). Oleryhlolsson (talk) 23:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If there discrepancies with Olympic rowers, I report those to a Canadian admin who is linked in with the Olympedia research team. I have yet to have a case where we collectively couldn’t resolve it. Take your time; there’s no hurry.  Schwede 66  08:12, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Referendums in Danish West Indies


A tag has been placed on Category:Referendums in Danish West Indies indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 05:27, 7 July 2024 (UTC)