User talk:Tore N Johansson

Welcome!

Hello, Tore N Johansson, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Mikael Ljungman does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below 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:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Fugu Alienking 16:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Mikael Ljungman shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. —Fugu Alienking (contribs) 11:46, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Tore N Johansson (talk) 09:35, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful when you perform these types of reverts unless you are familiar with Wikipedia sourcing policy. And please read this if it applies to you. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 02:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Mikael Ljungman.png

Thanks for uploading File:Mikael Ljungman.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Fugu Alienking (contribs) 14:35, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The source of the file was stated in the upload document.Tore N Johansson (talk) 16:58, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The source of the file is not in question. The status of the file as contributed to the public domain is what is in question, as the source does not automatically infer that on it. Also, the image appears as if it may be a professionally taken photograph, so it may not be as simple as asking permission from the account holder at twitter whose profile this appears on. —Fugu Alienking (contribs) 17:56, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let's remove it until we have found a solution.Tore N Johansson (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

Hi, Tore N Johansson. Since the biography of Mikael Ljungman is your only editing interest on Wikipedia, and since you have edited it and its talkpage to further a certain point of view, could you please disclose here whether you have any connection with the subject of the article? If you have, you're strongly discouraged from editing the article, see especially this part of the Conflict of interest policy. The different ways a person could have a conflict of interest are described here. If a person is paid for editing Wikipedia, they're required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose that affiliation as well as their employer, see Paid-contribution disclosure. Please respond below. Bishonen | talk 16:36, 5 February 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Hello again, Tore. I see you have edited since I asked the above, so I assume you've seen my question. I hope you realize that it's not a good idea to ignore something like that; please give it higher priority. Now that I've studied the history of Mikael Ljungman, may I also ask if you have any connection with the accounts User:Truthmaker1, User:Needlepinch and User:Riverside blue? Your agenda seems quite similar to theirs. Again, please respond. Bishonen | talk 16:58, 6 February 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Bishonen. I'm not employed by the subject or hired in any way to edit edit the article in the favor of the subject. I don't have a pre chosen agenda for the subject. I though have a scientific agenda because of earlier articles about how Wikipedia is used to slander and defame a person. The other scientific angle is authors personalization and choosen limitation of the article. it's really interesting that the article should / may contain information on convictions of both parties, but that the other Party restricts other infromation and additionally express a veto over the content. There seems to be no room for resent activities and activities that are / should be of biographical interest. No i don't have a connection with the accounts User:Truthmaker1, User:Needlepinch and User:Riverside blue. Is this article about a living person? Tore N Johansson (talk) 18:14, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN/I notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Huon (talk) 21:47, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Guy (Help!) 18:47, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]