User talk:Valentin8216

Your edit on Sweden
Hello. Your edit has been reverted for being unsourced and misleading. The section about poverty among pensioners is utterly misleading and not at all what the sources say, see post on the talk page of the article, so do not add it back again! - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 11:36, 7 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Want it on the record that my only contribution was the space between "355" and "000". I did NOT provide the actual information and numbers, but if it was wrong then thank you for correcting it.--Valentin8216 (talk) 11:49, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The rules here state that editors are responsible for everything they add here, regardless of if they're adding new own material or restoring material that has been removed by someone else, so always think twice before restoring material to articles here. The English Wikipedia has stricter rules than most other language versions of WP, and also interpret and enforce the rules stricter than on most other Wikipedias, so quite a few editors have gotten into trouble here for doing things the same way as they're being done on their "home Wikipedias". Cheers, - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 11:57, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

The reason for restoring the "revertion" to the old version was the addition of new images. Your revertion took those away together with the faulty information about the swedish pensions. Thanks for explaining though, im still a newbie here.--Valentin8216 (talk) 12:03, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I know I reverted the image too, it's called collateral damage, and being forced to add the image back again can be seen as punishment for not checking what you added in your previous edit. When you're editing here you should always keep in mind that the English language Wikipedia is an international English language encyclopaedia, where things are beeing seen in an international perspective, and not in a local "duck pond" perspective as on the Swedish language WP (and most others), so interpreting the sources about the pensioners as talking about a "poverty line", and living in poverty, might come natural to someone used to editing the Swedish WP, but not here, since to readers here being below the "poverty line" refers to really being poor (even though the interpretation of what is poverty and what isn't varies, with living in poverty in the industrialized world equalling middle-class standards in most other countries...), and the EU interpretation of "risk for relative poverty" (which is what the sources were talking about in the section I removed about poverty among pensioners in Sweden) is ~35% higher than even the "poverty line" in the US, and infinitely higher than the "poverty line" in most other countries. Which is what made that section misleading. Cheers, - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 12:27, 7 August 2018 (UTC)