User talk:Habj/Archive 1

Old stuff

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

Hello, I have deleted Användare:Habj because it was in the main namespace of wikipedia. If you could please keep personal promotion to User:Habj that would be great. Many thanks. -- Graham :) | Talk 19:09, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Recent changes

It seems OK to me... Fire Star 06:00, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

William Sheldon

I don't know a whole lot about him at the moment though I've been planning on looking him up in more detail. I've looked at his book on somatotypes, the pictures in it are really quite amazing -- lots of uncomfortable looking men in front of grids, with their faces and genitals whited out! I'm only really aware of him because of his Ivy League connection, which brought him a lot of controversy when he planned to release a book about women. Later they found a lot of his old pictures and most were apparently destroyed. If you do a google search for "Ivy League nudes" you can find some more information about him. Apparently he told his subjects that they were being photographed for posture information, which was apparently not true. Anyway he seems like quite an interesting figure. --Fastfission 15:37, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If you're very interested -- that is, interested enough to read a few obituaries -- I could certainly look up a few articles on him from scholarly journals and forward them to you as PDFs (it is much easier for me to look up articles than it is to read and synthesize them!). Let me know if you are interested. --Fastfission 17:06, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ellora

Hi, What I have written as the image caption is correct. I think someone else has changed the caption in the article page. I am 100% sure that what I have written is correct. KRS 03:39, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hello

They encourage people to write in English here, even if it's communication between two speakers of another language. So i'll just say hello to you in English :) Oh and i commented to your post on Swedish-speaking finns. See you! bbx 23:52, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Saami

Easy, since I took the picture. Possibly 20-30 km north of rovaniemi (which is on the polar circle in Finland). Don't know the name of the place exactly as I went there on a motorsnow. Must have took me 3 hours from the place where we lived :-) That day was the coldest I ever lived. And their nose was not frozen. I am still impressed. Anthere

About the Julia pic

The site where I got that image from says it is likely in the public domain, but just to make sure I have emailed another person who has that picture on his website. ~ Eszett 8 July 2005 13:23 (UTC)

Sorry, don't know any official länsteater term

Hello, Habj, nice to hear from you. Perhaps somebody told you I write theatre articles..? Well, I do, but I'm not a lot of use on Swedish theatrical concepts, nor on anything less than 300 years old, unfortunately. On the other hand, I could have sworn my university had a useful .pdf glossary of English names for Swedish institutions. In fact, they probably do have it, but I've just spent an unproductive 30 minutes trying in vain to find it on the site. Anyway, meanwhile, I guess the very concept of a länsteater is a Swedish folkrörelse kind of thing—I hardly suppose anglophone countries have the notion, let alone a term. Still and all, county theatre would be the obvious thing, don't you think? I checked out Talk:Anders Norudde, and I suggest something like Gävleborg's People's Theatre for Gävleborgs folkteater. The people's thing has cooperative and grassroots connotations, perhaps even too much so for this quite famous and tax-sponsored institution, but it's the best I can do. (I quite agree that the Popular Theatre in Gävle is unsuitable, not that I blame User:Takwish at all for using it, since it was on another site.) Anders Norudde is a nice article! Btw, it gives 1987 as the year of the milestone Peter Oskarsson production, while the sv.wiki article Den stora vreden has 1988 and 89—I suppose at least one of them has to be wrong? Best wishes, Bishonen | talk 20:44, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Municipalities

Hello. I just want to inform you that our articles have the article name format "X Municipality", to make them in line with "X County" (although in the article, their proper name, e.g. "Lidingö Stad" can be mentioned). I saw your notice on Talk:Övertorneå and wanted to let you know, before you start moving around articles. If you have arguments to present, you can do that at Talk:Municipalities of Sweden where we had a heated debate about this. Naturally this decision is possible to change.

Fred-Chess 15:03, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

False dementia

Thank you for your addition on false dementia to the dementia page. This phenomenon is more often called delirium, which is already mentioned elsewhere in the article. The disticntion beteween dementia and delirium is an important one, and your contribution in this regard is a valuable addition to the page. Thank you. Perhaps you, I, or another will be able to soon update your contribution so that it is more tied in to the rest of the article's discussion of delirium. sallison 09:21, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

musicians by instrument

There's not really a standard for inclusion, but I'd tend to agree with you. If he's not really known for kantele or singing, he doesn't belong in the category any more so than a famous actress would belong in the vocalists category just because she was in a musical once. Tuf-Kat 16:15, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings!

The reason it's so hard to find a central gathering place for musicians around here is, um, probably because there isn't one, but more like several separate places where small sections gather. Most of my work personally has been around Wikipedia:WikiProject Composers, and quite a few who work on classical music watch that page. There's also Wikipedia:WikiProject Music which doesn't see too much posting activity, but could probably use some: I suspect it's watched by many more people than it would seem from the activity. There's also a portal: Portal:Music and some subprojects but they're not very active. Perhaps we need a Musicians' Noticeboard, as some of the other projects have... most of the music editors I have run into are friendly and knowledgeable, but sometimes it takes a while to run into them; always nice to run into another. :-) What's your particular area of interest? Mindspillage (spill yours?) 19:27, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Martenot

Regarding the Martenot picture on nl-wikipedia: I guess copyright status is a bit tricky on this one. I found the image on the internet somewhere; when I uploaded it in february 2004 nl-wikipedia's policy on images wasn't very clear to me. I simply labeled it "Picture taken around 1930. Photographer unknown" and left it to the 'experts' to decide wether that was acceptable. Apparently one year later this led another user to label it 'public domain'. I've now changed this to to the more appropriate: "copyright status unknown". It will probably disappear from the nl-wikipedia in the near future. So, better not put it on commons I guess... Bart van der Pligt 03:28, 21 October 2005 (UTC) (Btw: the link to this page on your Dutch talk page didn't work. I took the liberty of changing it.)[reply]

Peter Rehse

Dear Habj - have we met on the Aikido forums (the name sounds very familiar). I actually like the Aikido article's lenght and depth and am quite content to ride shotgun so to speak. However, if you feel something particular needs work, by all means lets get together on it. PS. I have the strange feeling this is not the proper way to send or reply to messages but its the best I could do. Peter Rehse 07:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks - please let me know when and if you want to re-work something together.Peter Rehse 00:51, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed sensei up a bit and a minor edit for dan. I think the articles are as broad as they need be. I also trimmed the kyu one.Peter Rehse 04:59, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Habj; Merry Christmas. Could you do me a favor and have a look and possibly trim the European List of Famous Aikidoka. I mention the problem in the Talk of that page. Specifically the last entry (Chris) is 4th Dan, far from famous and he put it in himself - could be others like that. I'ld delete him myself but we've had discussion (see his talk page) and I think he means well. I'ld rather have the line of communication remain open so I need someone else to do the evil work first. Also I really don't have that much knowledge of who is who in Europe.Peter Rehse 13:13, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year. With regard to your comment on my Talk page on the Nariyama image I see no problems. I have however sent a link to all Shodokan Aikido related pages to Shodokan Honbu and asked specific permision for that image (it was given to me for my web site). I will act according to the response I'm given.Peter Rehse 09:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well Nariyama Shihan did not say no but these images are not worth the trouble. I just deleted them. I just deleted a couple of links and an edit on the Aikido page - please keep an eye out.Peter Rehse 04:44, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Habj - thanks for adding the descriptions on the List of Famous Aikidoka. My feeling is that if there is a link to an article than a one line description isn't necessary. No article - than a one line description as a temporary measure. Keeps it less cluttered in my opinion - what do you think?Peter Rehse 02:19, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I almost missed what you wrote, almost in the beginning of my talk page! My main opinion is this is not something that you and I should decide on my talk. It belongs to the article's talk, so I will bring the discussion there copying parts of what you have written above. // Habj 07:02, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The pici was just being played around with for a few minutes. It was never gone. CheersPeter Rehse 01:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

singerdraw

i honestly dont remember. it was on my comp for a while. i did a quick google search based on the file name and i got this site http://www.moreaucatholic.org/support/images/singer-lg.gif im not sure though. sry--Jaysscholar 06:57, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

sry--Jaysscholar 01:14, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Translation!?

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

The communist government allocated substantial resources to the development of agriculture. Large-scale programs of land reclamation, soil improvement, and irrigation, as well as increased use of fertilizers, all contributed to a significant expansion of agricultural production. Yet, despite impressive gains, agricultural production continues to be hindered by the persistence of traditional farming methods, low mechanization, and a lack of material incentives to encourage farmers to produce. This lasting legacy of the forced collectivization of agriculture and the abolition of private property has made it necessary to return land to the peasants and allow them to raise crops and livestock for private profit. The expansion of private agriculture is intended to pave the way for the introduction of new farming techniques and mechanization.

--Armour 14:34, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Changing interwiki

Hi Habj. As you can see from the top of Åmål Municipality, the article covers both the town and municipality, so interwikis can be made to either. Regards Fred-Chess 10:58, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I started answering here, but I'll put it on the article talk page instead. / Habj 15:43, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bach tag

Please see my note on [1] - Nunh-huh 05:59, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kata Image

Concerning the image of Kata Dalström, which I upploded a while ago, I found it on the internet, but have seen it on many different occasions before. I think this image, which was taken in the 1880s, which makes it very old, can be considered fair use because of it’s old age. No one claims the copyright to it, and it has been used by various sources over the last century, including encyclopedias, history books, and publications by different socialist and communist parties. Bronks December 6, 2005.

Block Users

I have a question which I can't seem to find a clear answer in the help section. Perhaps you know. Under my contributions you have my name|Talk|Block log. When I click on Block log it appears I can block users? Does everyone have this and when would/should I use it. Are there guidlines?Peter Rehse 05:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I got it thanks. For a moment I was rubbing my hands together relishing the power I seem to have aquired only to learn that I was looking at my own leash.Peter Rehse 07:25, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Habj

I'm rather afraid not, Habj. This isn't PD, it's still copyrighted to TIME magazine, it still has at least 35 years to go before it would be counted as PD. You could get away with fairuse if:

The article describes why the cover is significant to the subject, or the article that was in TIME was signficant along with a brief synopsis of the article
Another fair use rationale is given.

Are you able to give one? If not, I'll have to delete the image :( Ta bu shi da yu 12:55, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that it should be OK to upload images of old statues. However, I'd err on the side of caution and see if you can take them yourself. However, User:Raul654 might be able to help you on this issue, I believe that there was some case law that he knows about that covers the issue quite nicely. I think we even have an article on it! As for a user uploading fair use images, if they have been uploading lots of them or tagging incorrectly, firstly assume good faith and ask them politely why they have done this (they may be a newbie, or are making mistakes accidently). If you get no reply, or an unsatisfactory one, I'd suggest looking at his contribution list and start deleting all possible copyright infringements as per normal. I would suggest that all fair use images get listed. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:14, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ogg

Hi there. Thanks for letting me know. In fact I don't mind at all, though perhaps it would be better to transfer them all to commons rather than to particular wiki's. I'd do it myself a long time ago if it wasn't so time-consuming... Too bad there are no bots to do it. Anyway, thanks again for your attention - and translation of the tag. Halibu tt 21:09, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Science images and copyrights

You retagged an image for the article cytoskeleton. The image is on the Cancerquest website which provides the following copyright info:

All information and materials (including graphics, animations and web site design) on the CancerQuest site are copyrighted by and the exclusive property of Emory University or one of its affiliates. You may use and distribute the CancerQuest materials for personal or educational, noncommercial purposes only, provided you include all copyright notices contained on the site and the URL for the CancerQuest site (www.cancerquest.org). Any other use of the materials on the CancerQuest site is strictly prohibited without our prior written permission and the permission of the applicable rights holder(s).

I feel that I cited all the information that they said needed to be noted to use a CancerQuest image. I'm going to remove the tag, but if you have a problem please contact me.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Kablamo2007 (talk • contribs) 04:40, 19 March 2006

Moving pages

Hi, please don't move pages without discussion. Check on the talk page if you feel a title is inappropriate. Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 13:22, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll take a look. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 13:36, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the Jews and their Lies

Dear Habj:

A long discussion on the talk pages led to this title. Some were concerned that it would appear that wikipedia was charging Jews with lying rather than Luther. Out of respect, I'll leave your change, but I would appreciate you considering changing it back. --CTSWyneken 13:27, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It might well be appropriate. Sorry you had to back into this hornet's nest. --CTSWyneken 13:41, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]