User talk:Max Scharnberg

Welcome!

Hello, Max Scharnberg, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as The Södertälje Case, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Amortias (T)(C) 23:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of The Södertälje Case

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on The Södertälje Case requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:371744/FULLTEXT04. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Amortias (T)(C) 23:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ANSWER BY ARTICLE WRITER MAX SCHARNBERG, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR EMERITUS, UPPSALA UNIVERSITY. The W-page does not contain any kind of copyright infringement. The book (2009) was written by MS who has the full copyright to it. The summary of the book published at DiVA (the Digital Scientific Archive of all Swedish Universities was written by MS & Bo Edvardsson. The latter is associate professor emeritus at Örebro University. The aim of DiVA is to spread knowledge about Swedish research as much as possible, and DiVA never claims copyright for any text. The Wikipedia article (a brief summary of the long summary at DiVA) was written by MS, who in relation to DiVA has the full right to publish every word included in the Wikipedia article.

RELEVANT ADDENDUM: The addendum is basically concerned with a theme I shall in the next future initiate separately. But it is highly relevant in the present context. If the MS-article in Wikipedia should be re-entered, Wikipedia will contain one article with the heading "Södertälje Case" and another with the heading "The Södertälje Case". They will here be called "SC" and "TSC" respectively. "SC" also invokes the DiVA summary (for which there are no copyright restrictions). But the writer mendaciously claims that the DiVA summary is a "lay summary". He/she cannot be unaware of the fact that the DiVA summary was written by two associate professors, and that DiVA never publish lay summaries (and, as just said, claims no copyright of anything). The 2009-book by MS is one of the ten most comprehensive scientific analyses of legal cases published in Sweden, but this book is likewise called a "lay summary". A serious (and definitely intentional) error is that "SC" conceals that the books by Lundgren and Allmo plus the article by Kino, take for granted that the Södertälje girl told the truth about the numerous ritual child murders in Stockholm. - At "SC" Wikipedia has written: "This article may be expanded with text translated from the corresponding article in Swedish." This is a most uncomfortable statement, since the Swedish article is written by a fanatic believer in the prevalence of ritual child murders in Stockholm. Any attempt to add other facts will be deleted by some user in less than a minute. Evidently the Swedish article is constant surveyed for detecting any change. - Most probably the person who reported my English W-article for copyright infringement belongs to the group of fanatic believers, and realized that a report about copyright would be the best strategy for preventing the true nature of the Södertälje case.

SECOND AND TRIVIAL ADDENDOM: Astonishingly Wikipedia indicates me as a new user and asks me to prove that I exist. This is so despite the fact that the mechanics clearly recognized my name and code word. I have written and published Wikipedia articles and text changes in five languages.

CORRECTION OF ONE ERROR IN THIS ANSWER Sorry, my Wikipedia article is by no means merely a brief summary of the long DiVA summary. The article also contains important information of the content of the other books on the same legal case.

The södertälje case

I just deleted this article as a duplicate of an established article we already have: Södertälje case. Let me try to explain how this works. Wikipedia is not the place to publish your findings on a subject, because Wikipedia is not a publishing platform for original research. Whether you donate the text to Wikipedia or not is irrelevant because we cannot accept an essay on this subject anyway (although you are welcome to upload it to Wikisource if you wish). You could go to the existing article's talk page and request that changes be made to the article based on your material, because you have a conflict of interest and inserting your work will be seen as self-promotion. Either way, this is less about copyright violations than the appropriateness of your edits. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:43, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Södertälje case unreferenced information

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Södertälje case. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Bamyers99 (talk) 22:50, 16 December 2016 (UTC) To Jezebel’s Ponyo. As you are fully aware of: I have in every respect worked to build an encyclopedia, until YOU made it clear that YOU are not interested in building an encyclopedia. YOU prefer mendacious to truthful articles. And YOU prefer articles devoid of information to articles providing an adequate amount of details for a dictionary. As I have already made clear, I am not in the least interested in posting any text if it shall be censored by people who entertain a fanatic belief in the frequency of ritual child murders in Stockholm.[reply]

February 2017

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Södertälje case have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Materialscientist (talk) 08:21, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:44, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]