User talk:Yinandjang
Disambiguation link notification for June 10
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Innovation management, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Product, Opportunity and Process (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:57, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Let's talk about this a bit before we go trampling all over each other's toes. I think the introduction is still a little top-heavy -- some of that content could be moved down into the main body of the article. humblefool® 02:21, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
- I agree that it should be moved into the main body of the article.
- As for the reductions:
- I myself have cut out some pieces, e.g. advertisements for various universities (I wrote a section on the discussion page about this).
- Large parts of the text also seemed like they were Google-translated, I have been working to correct these and rewrite them into a logically understandable text. Small sections, where it was absolutely impossible to understand what the writer had in mind, were removed.
- However, I do believe that the original text, primarily written by CIM2014, despite its grammatical mistakes and at times repetitive nature, contained lots of interesting viewpoints and information that should be kept and could be developed further.
- All the best, Yinandjang (talk) 14:17, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 26
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stockholm School of Economics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Japanese. 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) 09:03, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 5
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stockholm School of Economics, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages SAS and Roseum. 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) 09:27, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Yinandjang. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Yinandjang. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
May 2018
[edit]
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Caspar David Friedrich has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Specifically this edit, which, even if the change was correct, it was not a typo. freshacconci (✉) 21:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Absolutely. Now I've added accurate revision descriptions. Yinandjang (talk) 21:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Of course, I wasn't talking about that edit, but the one I linked to above. freshacconci (✉) 21:17, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Actually he was Swedish-German, as he was born in Sweden, and lived in Sweden for most of his life. Yinandjang (talk) 21:19, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- That's something you will have to discuss on the article talk page rather than re-adding it again. He was ethnically German; we would need a source for more than that. freshacconci (✉) 21:24, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Sure, could have been discussed at the talk page first. I didn't realize it was a controversial issue, as Greifswald, where the painter was born, was a Swedish city, and stayed so for most of his life, and he himself was a Swedish citizen for most of his life. Sweden didn't have any official ethnicities, saying that he was "of German ethnicity" thus seems to be later invention, especially as Germany didn't even exist during this time. Yinandjang (talk) 21:42, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- No, what you're describing is a later invention. And likewise, Greifswald was never a "Swedish" city but rather a German city that was conquered by the Kingdom of Sweden. It remained German throughout its brief annexation. As for "most of his life", he left Greifswald when he was 24 and lived in Dresden (which I think you'll agree is a German city) where he lived for most of the next 46 years. As for Greifswald, it became part of the Kingdom of Prussia in 1815. The concept of hyphenated ethnicities is recent. A German born in a German town, regardless of which kingdom it happened to be part of, saw himself as German -- even though no "Germany" existed as a unified nation. This is true of any number of ethnicities in Europe's complicated history. Believe me, most of the citizens of the Austro-Hungarian empire did not consider themselves to be "Austrians". You will need to find a source that states unambiguously that Friedrich ever considered himself Swedish in order to make such a change. freshacconci (✉) 22:07, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- NO, GREIFSWALD WAS A SWEDISH TOWN, AND "GERMANY" DID NOT EVEN EXIST DURING HIS LIFETIME. "GERMANY" IS A MODERN INVENTION. If you believe that a Swedish citizen viewed himself as "German," you have to prove that by showing sources. Yinandjang (talk) 22:13, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- No, Greifswald was part of the Kingdom of Sweden from 1631-1815, a mere 184 years in its over 819 years history. A unified German state was established in 1871 but the German people existed far longer than that -- that's what the unification was, uniting the hundreds of German states into one nation. As for proof, the onus is on you as you want to make the change. And you will find that most, if not all, reliable sources in history and art history refer to Friedrich as a German artist. As I said, discuss it on the talk page and get consensus. freshacconci (✉) 22:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- YES, GREIFSWALD HAD BEEN PART OF SWEDEN FOR ALMOST 200 YEARS. HOW COULD IT THEN BE A "GERMAN" TOWN, IF THAT COUNTRY DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE ALMOST 100 YEARS LATER? IT WAS YOU WHO STARTED DISCUSSING THE ISSUE ON MY DISCCUSSION PAGE, AND YOU FAILED THE DISCUSSION, SINCE YOU BASED YOUR ARGUMENTS ON YOUR OWN PRIVATE INVENTIONS. Yinandjang (talk) 22:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- No, I started this discussion because of your deceptive use of edit summaries, as you did here. Again, the rest should be discussed on the article talk page and you will need to provide reliable and verifiable sources and get consensus if you want to make those changes. freshacconci (✉) 22:55, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- THE ONLY ONE WHO IS DECEPTIVE HERE IS YOU, WHO TRY TO CLASSIFY PEOPLE AND GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS TO STATES WHICH DIDN'T YET EXIST. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE CLAIMS ON MY DISCUSSION PAGE, YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE REFERENCES. I'M STILL WAITING FOR YOUR REFERENCE PROVING THAT THE PAINTER "viewed himself as 'German,'" WHICH YOU ERRONEOUSLY TRIED TO INSINUATE ABOVE.
- If you are German, you should remember that Germanic peoples originated in southern Scandinavia, and then migrated to Germany. We Scandinavians always viewed you Germans as our offspring and children. Children should pay respect to their parents, and that includes miserable little Germans. Greetings from Scandinavia. Yinandjang (talk) 23:16, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- No, I started this discussion because of your deceptive use of edit summaries, as you did here. Again, the rest should be discussed on the article talk page and you will need to provide reliable and verifiable sources and get consensus if you want to make those changes. freshacconci (✉) 22:55, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- YES, GREIFSWALD HAD BEEN PART OF SWEDEN FOR ALMOST 200 YEARS. HOW COULD IT THEN BE A "GERMAN" TOWN, IF THAT COUNTRY DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE ALMOST 100 YEARS LATER? IT WAS YOU WHO STARTED DISCUSSING THE ISSUE ON MY DISCCUSSION PAGE, AND YOU FAILED THE DISCUSSION, SINCE YOU BASED YOUR ARGUMENTS ON YOUR OWN PRIVATE INVENTIONS. Yinandjang (talk) 22:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- No, Greifswald was part of the Kingdom of Sweden from 1631-1815, a mere 184 years in its over 819 years history. A unified German state was established in 1871 but the German people existed far longer than that -- that's what the unification was, uniting the hundreds of German states into one nation. As for proof, the onus is on you as you want to make the change. And you will find that most, if not all, reliable sources in history and art history refer to Friedrich as a German artist. As I said, discuss it on the talk page and get consensus. freshacconci (✉) 22:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- NO, GREIFSWALD WAS A SWEDISH TOWN, AND "GERMANY" DID NOT EVEN EXIST DURING HIS LIFETIME. "GERMANY" IS A MODERN INVENTION. If you believe that a Swedish citizen viewed himself as "German," you have to prove that by showing sources. Yinandjang (talk) 22:13, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- No, what you're describing is a later invention. And likewise, Greifswald was never a "Swedish" city but rather a German city that was conquered by the Kingdom of Sweden. It remained German throughout its brief annexation. As for "most of his life", he left Greifswald when he was 24 and lived in Dresden (which I think you'll agree is a German city) where he lived for most of the next 46 years. As for Greifswald, it became part of the Kingdom of Prussia in 1815. The concept of hyphenated ethnicities is recent. A German born in a German town, regardless of which kingdom it happened to be part of, saw himself as German -- even though no "Germany" existed as a unified nation. This is true of any number of ethnicities in Europe's complicated history. Believe me, most of the citizens of the Austro-Hungarian empire did not consider themselves to be "Austrians". You will need to find a source that states unambiguously that Friedrich ever considered himself Swedish in order to make such a change. freshacconci (✉) 22:07, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Sure, could have been discussed at the talk page first. I didn't realize it was a controversial issue, as Greifswald, where the painter was born, was a Swedish city, and stayed so for most of his life, and he himself was a Swedish citizen for most of his life. Sweden didn't have any official ethnicities, saying that he was "of German ethnicity" thus seems to be later invention, especially as Germany didn't even exist during this time. Yinandjang (talk) 21:42, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- That's something you will have to discuss on the article talk page rather than re-adding it again. He was ethnically German; we would need a source for more than that. freshacconci (✉) 21:24, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Actually he was Swedish-German, as he was born in Sweden, and lived in Sweden for most of his life. Yinandjang (talk) 21:19, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Of course, I wasn't talking about that edit, but the one I linked to above. freshacconci (✉) 21:17, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Yinandjang. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)