User talk:Old Dane

Welcome!

Hello, Old Dane, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! S.G.^(GH) _ping! 13:02, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - Kind regardsOld Dane (talk) 13:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Glatved Beach

Hello Old Dane, it is a nice article, but it needs sources. Here is a brief introduction about how to cite here on Wikipedia. Don't hesitate to ask me if you need any help. Thanks for your contributions :) --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 10:25, 5 March 2014 (UTC) Thanks Vejvančický - It's a bit difficult some places, as some of the info is based on local knowledge. Kind RegardsOld Dane (talk) 11:23, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. On Wikipedia we cannot write articles based on local or personal knowledge. This a general rule of Encyclopedias. If a subject is not described in the literature and writing, the first thing to do would be to write about it and publish it somewhere. Then it can be used as a source for writing a Wikipedia/Encyclopedian article. At the same time the credibility of that source should be discussed if necessary. Read the link that Vejvančický supplied, please.

I have put in some on-line sources on the Glatved article (both the Danish and the English). The next step will be to cite them in-line as references. Regards. RhinoMind (talk) 15:02, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - Kind regards Old Dane (talk) 07:50, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kalø Slot

Hej. Jeg skriver lige på dansk, da vi begge forstår det. Pas på når du retter i andre folks arbejde på Wikipedia. Du må hjertens gerne tilføje info, manglende referencer, forbedre kildehenvisningerne, indsætte billeder osv., men når du retter i andres arbejde skal du være ekstra varsom og omhyggelig. Af mange grunde. De vigtigste retningslinjer er at man helst ikke sletter information, medmindre det der står er decideret forkert og selv da, skal det ofte diskuteres på "talk"-siden først, især hvis der kan være tale om andre synsvinkler og ikke bare forkert info. Prøv at se hvordan det gøres på forskellige kontroversielle sider, hvor procedurerne nok er mest iøjnfaldende.

Mht. selve syntaxen og kodesproget på Wikipedia (f.eks. hvordan 'ref', 'cn', 'gallery' og indsættelse af billeder fungerer), så prøv at leg lidt med det hele i det der hedder "Sandbox", før du kaster dig over konkrete rettelser på de endelige sider. Så kan man øve sig uden at gøre skade. Uden at ville genere din person, kan jeg se at du har meget at lære omkring det her. Studér forskellige sider for at se hvordan opgaverne løses, det er som regel en god og nem måde at lære nyt på og en metode jeg selv anvender i stor stil. Der er også mulighed for at skaffe en Wikipedia-mentor, hvis man har mod på det.

Hvorfor skriver jeg alt det? Først og fremmest fordi nogle af de "edits" du pt. har lavet på Kalø Slot ikke er acceptable. Der er deciderede fejl, der er slettet information, og det roder gevaldigt med selve side-opsætningen. Jeg har ikke pt. tid til at rette det op og jeg føler det er bedre at tage problemerne op her, for at undgå mange fremtidige problemer. Jeg har selv været hvor du er, for ikke ret lang tid siden og jeg ønsker at give dig noget konstruktiv respons, for at undgå at du med tiden vil blive stemplet som "hærværksmand". Ja det lyder barskt, men det risikerer man altså.

RhinoMind (talk) 01:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hej RhinoMind,

Tak for dine råd, især m.h.t. ikke at slette andres oplysninger, og især ikke, hvis ikke man har drøftet det med kilden først. Klart og fornuftigt...Du henviser til Kalø Slot, men jeg har ikke ændret på oplysninger, eller rørt ved teksten overhovedet - men tilføjet nogle bedre fotos til artiklen, samt et lokalisationskort, der viser, hvor Kalø ligger... Så der er et eller andet, der ikke stemmer... Du skriver, at der er deciderede fejl, og at der er slettet information i teksten. Her må jeg melde hus forbi - hvorvidt er der tale om en misforståelse? MVH Old Dane (talk) 07:59, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NB - tak for henvisningen til mulige kilder til Glatved Strand - artiklen. Det var en god hjælp. MVHOld Dane (talk) 08:04, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2 x NB hej nu tror jeg, at jeg er mere med - du henviser til den engelsksprogede om Kalø, som jeg ganske rigtigt var inde på igår. Jeg troede du henviste til den danske. I den engelske var jeg inde om teksten, men kun på et et enkelt uskyldigt punkt: Jeg syntes, det var synd, at nogle interessante oplysninger om Kalø-navnets oprindelse, kun var anført i kildehenvisningen under (Ref) - efter artiklen. Jeg tilføjede dem derfor til artiklens slutning. Her stod der bl.a., at Kalø/ Kalv-navnet, kunne henvise til, at Kalø var kalv/ alias barn til et større land. Hvor jeg så for egen regning tilføjede, at Fænø Kalv, en ø i Lillebælt, også har navn ud fra at det større, Fænø, ligger i nærheden. Jeg må melde mig skyldig i at have slettet en vurdering i Kalø-note-referencen om, at Kalø nok var navngivet efter, at der gik kvæg på halvøen, hvilket jo er tilfældet i dag. Den ændring burde jeg nok have drøftet i et diskussionsforum inden. MVHOld Dane (talk) 08:40, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg er lige forbi igen og smider lige en kort kommentar i forbifarten. Ja, det var den engelske udgave jeg havde i tankerne. Ja, der er tale om forholdsvis små forseelser, men jeg er bange for at det kunne udvikle sig til nogle større sager. Du må gerne indsætte infoen du slettede igen. Din reference til Fænø er fin, men sørg for en kilde på det, ellers bør du ikke nævne det som et eksempel. Du kan muligvis finde kilde på det i den kilde noten er taget fra. Prøv at led lidt efter det. Det er faktisk en spændende bog alt i alt at dykke lidt ned i og den kan give en masse nyttig viden om mangt og meget. Der er mange andre eksempler på lignende navngivning i DK. Det kan der muligvis også findes kilder på i bogen. Hvis du vil flytte noten til selve teksten, så er det kotume at lave en sektion der hedder "Etymologi" og den står som regel i starten at siden.

Glatved Strand. Tak for rosen. Der lå en del arbejde i det, men nu ligger kilderne oppe på siden. Meningen var egentligt at de skulle referes til "in-line" som det hedder. Prøv at arbejde lidt på det. Det er en god øvelse i Wikipedia kode. Ja, det tager tid, men det er dét der giver kvalitet og gør Wikipedia troværdigt for udenforstående. Ok, det var bare lidt kort feed-back, som man kunne handle umiddelbart på. Jeg smutter igen. Go' Wiki-ing ! RhinoMind (talk) 23:38, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Grenå may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 4 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:37, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Trehøje Mols, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Knebel. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 15:26, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New articles

Hi Old Dane,

It's really great to have so many interesting new articles from you but it would be even better if you could check out the categories and other links for the en wiki. I'll try to help you along but sooner or later you should try to cope with these things yourself.--Ipigott (talk) 21:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ipigott,

Thank you for your mail. After reading it, I have looked into the subject a bit, and can see that the Wikicode for adding categories is straight forward - my first step to adding relevant categories. Now I need to find good ways to generate them. Here I have got as far as to the idea of copying category-lines from similar-subject articles. But I am still in doubt about the best other ways, such as by means of some existing lists, search functions for this in Wikipedia, that might exist - or other methods? So if you have got tips, they would be much appreciated. Kind regardsOld Dane (talk) 09:21, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever I need to add new categories, I look for existing categories which are similar. These give clues about the categories which need to be added when creating a new category. It may also be useful for you to look at the categories which have already been added to the articles you have created. But if you run into problems, just let me know.--Ipigott (talk) 15:17, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again - Thanks a lot - it seems I am on the right track - and thank you also for bringing the issue of categories to my attention - All the best, and kind regards Old Dane (talk) 15:34, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jernhatten, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hjelm. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:55, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sletterhage Lighthouse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hjelm. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 12:30, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stabelhøje, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Agri. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:29, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nappedam

Hello, I'm Deb. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.

Recent edit to Roll Over Beethoven

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Roll Over Beethoven, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 08:56, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Materialscientist,

Thanks for your message to me, that you removed the song-lyrics I added to the article on Roll over Beethoven. I understand your objections. Basically I think it's a sound idea that the lyrics should be added to the article. I can also see that there is already a link to them at the bottom of the article, and one solution might be to add the text from this link and source (MetroLyrics) to the article. As to the question of reliable source, I did consider this somewhat before adding the lyrics from A-Z Lyrics (top hit on Google when searching for the song-lyrics) Here I also considered if I should quote A-Z lyrics directly, but chose not to, as this might be seen as advertising for a particular source and site. I found it more appropriate just to state that the source is online. I think it might be difficult to know if the source already used in the link is more reliable than A-Z Lyrics. I hope you understand my considerations. Please feel free to add the lyrics in some form, as this improves the article. If you chose not to, I might give it a go again in a couple of days. The problem still might be how to find a suitably reliable and accurate source. Maybe the best temporary solution is to state that the lyrics may not be 100 pct accurate, as they are from an online source - more or less like I did, but in a more Wikipedian form. Thus leaving it up to someone to find a better source and maybe more accurate lyrics-text - but still leaving the maybe inaccurate lyrics in the article, as this improves the documentation of the actual content of the recently deceased Chuck Berry song. Something that is missing. Kind regards.

Nomination of Kalø Vintage Car Rally for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kalø Vintage Car Rally is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalø Vintage Car Rally until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:30, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]