User talk:Swedenman

A welcome from Sango123
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:


 * If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Simplified Ruleset
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Wikipedia Glossary

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy editing!

-- Sango  123   (talk)  17:17, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

Hero
Hi. That content has been removed for good reasons. Amongst its faults are that it is somewhat POV, has no references at all, and is any case badly written and spelt. Morwen - Talk 12:20, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Please stop adding back that content without even discussing it on the talk page. It was removed for reasons listed on the AfD. Putting it back in repeatedly without discussion shows a flagrant lack of regard for consensus on your part. -- Hinotori(talk) 12:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

3RR warning
Concerning List of dictators. Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. &asymp; jossi &asymp; t • @ 00:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Malcolm Betruger

 * "Play Doom 3 so you will see. Swedenman 16:19, 28 January 2006 (UTC)"

Thank you for at least responding to the Malcolm Betruger issue, but telling me to play Doom 3 is not enough. You have to tell me specifically where I will find the devil, especially because I don't want to waste my time searching the whole game and particularly if there isn't even conclusive evidence of the devil. The only reference to a devil that I can remember off the top of my head in Doom 3 is Ishii saying, "The devil is real; I built his cage," and this is not conclusive proof because it could be simply a metaphor to the demons. As well, there is a possibility that the Swedish version of Doom 3 has translated something from the English version to "devil" when it is not supposed to be. If you play the Swedish version, you really must consider this possibility. So, please point out the specific references. I suppose I'll revert the bit about the devil if nothing is given to me before the beginning of 29 January 2006 (UTC). All of this in favour of destroying any falsity :) --70.25.168.90 17:37, 28 January 2006 (UTC)


 * "You can not see the devil in the game but you can hear him laugh or then he say "The death is not the end. You going to burn in HELL" or "I have the Soul Cube in the hell". Swedenman 17:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)"

I'm not trying to be on your case, but this voice is ambiguous and therefore inconclusive; it is not clear that this is the devil. In case there's some real evidence that we may be missing, I'm not going to remove the bit about the devil for at least 12 hours. If you feel that I am right and you can't find any more evidence, you're welcome to remove it yourself, of course. My best regards, --70.25.168.90 22:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Swedenman, can you please explain why you persist on mentioning that there is a devil in Doom 3 even though you have not shown any convincing evidence for his existence? I have asked for such evidence since the creation of this section of your talk page on January 28 but you have not provided any clear evidence, therefore I will continue to remove these mentions of the devil in Doom 3. Best of luck, --70.25.168.90 21:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


 * "Here it is a evidence at it is a Devil in the game. In the begine of the Hell level, You can can hear the Devil then he explain at he and Betruger going to takr over the earth and doing it to a new Hell and you going to be kill before you can stop, and am promise at it is NOT Dr. Betruger's voice. It sounds more evil and more dark. Mvh" Swedenman 18:44, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Swedenman, you've already told me about this voice the last time! And I've said that, with what you have provided, we still can't conclude that this is the devil speaking instead of anything else. Other than the fact that this is not Betruger's voice and a mention of the devil from the Mars City Underground scientist (which seems rather metaphoric), there isn't much else to say in favour of the existence of "the devil" in Doom 3. For example, I can say that this is not the voice of the devil; it's the voice of the Maledict! So again, no clear evidence has been established yet. I realize and appreciate your effort into proving this case, but unfortunately it seems as if our language barrier is preventing good communication between us, which is starting to irritate me somewhat. --70.25.168.90 21:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


 * "Hi, How do you know at it is the Maledict and not the Devil." Swedenman 13:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, this is exactly my point! I don't know that this voice is the Maledict's and, from what you've given me, you don't know for sure that this voice is the devil's, either. Thus, because there are disputes and questions (especially ambiguity) towards this topic, we can't say that this voice is specifically the devil's! --70.25.168.90 08:28, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

svar:Hej
Hej hej, det e bra. Bronks femte februati, tjugohundrasex

"No nazi wedsite"
Please do not delete proper external links from articles. Thanks, -Will Beback 21:08, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Continued deletions are not helpful and approach vandalism. Please stop or you may be blocked from editing. -Will Beback 20:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)


 * If you want to nominate the articles for deletion then do that. But don't vandlaize the articles while they are here. -Will Beback 20:08, 14 February 2006 (UTC)


 * There's no consensus to remove the links. I appreciate your dislike of Nazi websites, but we always link to the website of the group or person we're discussing. -Will Beback 17:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Jesus
Please make your case on the talk page. Thanks...KHM03 18:43, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Regarding this article, please be aware of the three revert rule. Nobody wishes for you to get blocked but this will be necessary if you do not adhere to the procedure. Thanks. Deskana (talk) 18:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Pope John XXIII a humanist?
Please explain why you think John XXIII could be described as a humanist. Stroika 20:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Mother Teresa
Hi, an editor believes that she can be categorised under humanitarians rather than humanists as is evident from his edit summary on removal of your cat addition. You have re-added the cat now. Why not raise and debate the issue on Talk:Mother Teresa? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gurubrahma (talk • contribs)
 * Because he can't. He kept on destroying articles on the swedish Wikipedia for almost half a year and made almost 1500 edits, not very many of theme were serious. He was blocked, and told several times to stop, but he didn't understand that what he was doing were wrong. //81.224.183.67 15:56, 24 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Och vad menar du med det? Kanske jag förstår om du skriver på svenska. //81.224.183.67 15:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Edit war
Stop your unreflecting edit wars! Probert 17:29, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Adding category:Humanitarians
Please stop doing this. Wikipedia works by Consensus, and these categories are not wanted. Don't persist.

Slutligen, om du inte förstår engelska, skaffa en ordbok eller skriv inte på engelska Wikipedia.

(Translate: Lastly, if you don't understand English, acquire a dictionary or stop writing on English Wikipedia)

Fred-Chess 14:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for 24 hours
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

Jag har blockerat dig 24 timmar. Var god diskutera. Det hjälper inte att återställa, utan folk blir bara trötta.
 * Translate: I have blocked you 24 hours. Please discuss, there is no point in reverting, just making people tired.

Fred-Chess 17:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

He Fengshan
Please do not revert notices of copyright violation without proof that you are the copyright holder to the posted article. Thanks, Mindspillage (spill yours?) 02:45, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Edit wars
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

I hade never vandalize a article. It is you who going it. Swedenman

Please stop your unreflecting edit wars! You will only end up blocked! Probert 19:53, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Bill Gates
Jag tänker inte tjafsa om Sankta Lucia och Dag Hammarskjöld. Kanske har du rätt. Men Bill Gates finns i kategorin category:American philanthropists. Den kategorin är en underkategori till Category:Humanitarians. En filantrop är nämligen en person som skänker stora summor pengar. Alltså behöver han inte också vara i kategorin humanitarians.

Kan du hålla med mig om detta?

Fred-Chess 20:13, 7 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Se Categorization:
 * Articles should not usually be in both a category and its subcategory. For example Golden Gate Bridge is in Category:Suspension bridges, so it should not also be in Category:Bridges. However there are occasions when this guideline can and should be ignored.  For example, Robert Duvall is in Category:Film actors as well as its subcategory Category:Best Actor Oscar.  See #5 for another exception.  For more about this see 'Categorization/Categories and subcategories
 * Fred-Chess 17:21, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Che Guevara categorisation
Hello, Swedenman. Could you please explain why you keep adding Category:Humanitarians to the Che Guevara article? Several users have expressed doubt that Guevara could be classified as a "humanitarian". Thanks.  Lord  ViD 14:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

In what way is Che Guevara a humanitarian? Please discuss your edits instead of waging unreflecting edit wars! Probert 13:14, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

go and see the movie The Motorcycle Diaries. Swedenman 13:41, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Humanitarians don't execute people...hell if we went by what people did in their youth why not glorify Adolf Hitler, he was an artist who loved animals, was a vegitarian, and wanted a government that took care of the poor and labor class from birth to death. I think maybe we should put him in as a humanitarian too.  (Gibby 22:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC))


 * LOL!! Good point, Gibby! Probert 23:21, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

No, he was a mass murdere, war criminal, gay and a big motherfucker. It is not Che Guevara. Swedenman 11:09, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Not true, Adolf Hitler is believed to have actually killed ZERO people himself. Che Guevara on the otherhand personally tortured and executed at least several hundred.  Perhaps its time to stop idolizing pyschopaths...just because he was a communist doenst mean he was all that and a bag of chips. (Gibby 18:33, 12 March 2006 (UTC))

Che Guevara was a Hero with a big H. Hitler murded, destroying, kill, invaded other country, killed and tortured 6 million jews and in the war he started died 50 million people. Swedenman 07:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Please cease adding that category. Several users have agreed now that is is not an appropriate category. This means that a consensus has been established against adding that category. Again, please STOP.  Lord  ViD 18:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Probert 19:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Muqtada al-Sadr
In what way is Muqtada al-Sadr a humanitarian? Please do NOT categorize politicians arbitrarily! Probert 14:24, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


 * He fought against the americans in Iraq with same way like Gandhi and he helped the poor people in Iraq. Swedenman 18:32, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


 * What sources do you have for this statement? Probert 19:18, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


 * FROM THE SWEDISH WIKIPEDIAN.


 * You do NOT need to shout! What "Swedish wikipedian"? Please discuss your edits instead of engaging in tiresome edit wars. Probert 19:56, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Please do not revert Muqtada al-Sadr, at least without entering references to his "humanitarian" activities in the article. --Aegwyn 07:39, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for 30 minutes
Hello again. You have been blocked for 30 minutes for your reverts on Muqtada al-Sadr.


 * Var god diskutera på diskussionssidorna. Det är det de är till för. Diskutera inte med edit-kommenterarer.
 * Please discuss on discuss pages. That's what they are there for. Do not discuss by edit summaries.

Mvh Fred-Chess 20:21, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Violation of 3RR
Nice goin', buddy! You've just violated the 3RR for reverting the article Muqtada al-Sadr. Probert 13:47, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

30 minutes break
I blocked you for 30 minutes for excessive revertion of Muqtada al-Sadr, as per the three revert rule.

Note: If you add the category:Humanitarians to Muqtada al-Sadr, Che Guevara or Bill Gates again, I will block you immediately.

Fred-Chess 13:56, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Blocked 24 hours for disruptive behaviour
Hello. You have been blocked 24 hours for disruptive behaviour. If you want to continue discussing category:Humanitarians for articles Che Gueavara, and others, please use the talk page. In you persist in adding the categories to the articles, you will be blocked again. / Fred-Chess 17:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: On March 17, 2006, Swedenman added category:Humanitarians to Muqtada al-Sadr five times (i.e. he added the category and reverted back to his edit four times). --Bowlhover 21:06, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

oh nevermind he must be using a sockpuppet.

Leftist appologists like yourself SDNM and Che himself, think that Che was a humanitarian, but that does not make one so. Killing people, torturing people, does not really qualify one for that. You have a very clouded, perverted, outlook on what is really going on.

(Gibby 11:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC))

haha, Sadr isnt a humanitarian either. You have a twisted definition of what a humanitarian is. The definition has gotten so warped by you, one could make an arguement based on your fallacious logic that George Bush II is a humanitarian... (Gibby 14:17, 18 March 2006 (UTC))

3RR block on Muqtada al-Sadr

 * [[Image:Stop_hand.png|30px|left]] You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy . If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to do so after the block expires.  Please learn from this and stop being disruptive.  It's not about the content it's about the 3RR and needing to respect consensus no matter how strongly you believe you're right.Gator (talk) 21:25, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

One week

 * [[Image:Stop_hand.png|30px|left]] You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy . If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to do so after the block expires.  Please learn from this and stop being disruptive.  It's not about the content it's about the 3RR and needing to respect consensus no matter how strongly you believe you're right.Fred-Chess 12:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Indefinite
I have blocked you indefiantely for continued vandalisma dn trollign with you humanitarain edits. Despite numerous blocks for the smae editing issues, yuo continue to do it. You obviously just want to be blocked an I have obliged.Gator (talk) 12:54, 7 April 2006

I think that permanent block is unfair, everybody know at Jesus is a Humanitarian. Swedenman 07:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You appear to have a string of blocks for revert warring and general trolling, so you've been adequately warned that such behaviour is unacceptable, the block stands. --pgk( talk ) 08:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * (response to nth request for unblock) No, knock it off. - O bli (Talk) ? 19:50, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * No again. --pgk( talk ) 11:25, 29 April 2006 (UTC)