User talk:Tsaddik Dervish

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(questions asked here will normally be answered here)


Welcome!

Hello, Tsaddik Dervish, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few 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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  -- Rama 12:21, 4 August 2005 (UTC)


Thank you! Tsaddik Dervish 15:02, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

remember#REDIRECT link here

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hi! Glad to see you here. I can see that you've done some good additions to Sweden-related articles - that's great! Also glad to see that you've found your way to the Swedish Wikipedians' notice board. I noticed that you added a large number of requests to the to-do list on top. While keeping some of them, I took the liberty to move others to the main list on the main page of the notice board. I hope you're not going to be angry with me for this. While the to-do list policy hasn't really been discussed that much, common consensus seems to be to keep the to-do list down to a small "smorgasboard" of items from different subject areas. Since the main list of requests is a major feature on the notice board page (at least for now) I don't think this is much of a problem, but feel free to object if you like. Anyway, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope to see you continuing to add good content to Swedish-related articles! / Alarm 14:13, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Very grateful for your kindness. And, especially, for your patience. As for the to-do list on the notice board I trust you know what works best. Many thanks, Tsaddik Dervish 03:11, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Blatte" and "svenne"

Since you are writing about Swedish hip hop, perhaps you might weigh in on the issue of these articles. Are they doomed to remain dictionary definitions, or is it possible to write encyclopedic articles on their use in Swedish youth culture? They are both nominated for deletion. If you think you can expand the articles, it would be a good time to do so now. Uppland 06:28, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

I'll look into it although I don't think I'm sociologically/linguistically qualified enough to be of much use. Thanks for the notice. --Tsaddik Dervish 14:54, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] responding

Hello.

I agree that another image on Swedish hip hop would be nice, but I don't know anyone in that world so my possiblities are limited. I'll see what I can do.

--Fred-Chess 07:46, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Swedish graffiti artist listed on Votes for deletion

I don't know if you've noticed, but an article on graffiti artist Dwane has been listed on Votes for deletion. Uppland has added some notes about the person behind the alias, but his notability seems somewhat unclear. My guess is that you are the editor around here most familliar with the Swedish graffiti scene - perhaps you can contribute to the discussion? / Alarm 15:23, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Katrina

I saw that you had vandalized my userpage; which Rhaworth quickly reverted. I understand that you perceived my edit to the international response as a joke/vandalism, but I genuinely had not seen the talk page. Thats why I kept your edit when I reverted my merger and removed the merge tag since the consensus on the talk page was against it. Sorry for the misunderstanding. freestylefrappe 03:33, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

First there was a suggestion of merging International response which all users (that commented) was opposed to. Then you put up the 'speedy delete' template and made a comment in the disaster relief article that the merging of the articles were complete, which was far from the truth. I thought you were trying to get rid of the article against consencus/established guidelines. Seeing that it was a misunderstanding I sincerely apologize for jumping to conclusions and putting the delete template on your page. --Tsaddik Dervish 03:56, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sweden

Hello. Here are some info about article Sweden. I guess I could write this on Talk:Sweden but this is social too, no?

I am trying to get people to appreciate the fine art of sub pages. This would mean to put only essential info on main article "Sweden", and the other info into sub pages.

My suggestion is to have 3-4 paragraphs on every section on article Sweden to make it assesible for common people, and to remove mentions of "Beowulf" and similar nerdish notions that are probably not known anywhere except in small circles.

If you wonder what the lead section is all about, it is intended as go in line with the national anthem. Give your opinions on it.

The diagram on section Sweden#Demographics is wrong -- embarrassing, but no one has complained so it may as well stay for now...

Section Sweden#Politics should be shortened with one or two paragraphs. I've tried, but to be frank I don't understand Sweden's politics (except that we're voting every four years or so), and the section does not make me understand it either, so I can't do it.

Section Sweden#Welfare state should be linked to a main article, which we currently don't have. I asked User:Tfine80 if he wanted to translate the German article, but nothing has happened. Too bad, because it is essential for understanding Sweden of today, I think, something you be able to by just reading the Norse Sagas, Beowulf and Tacitus. A translation is listed at the todo list on the notice board.

Sweden#Religion would also need a sub article as it currently just grows and grows...

That is somewhat of a "To Do" list in my head... I'm not implying it is your task, but I've seen your interest in the article, and came to give my appreciation with some possible improvement suggestions that I currently can't do myself.

Fred-Chess 10:01, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Swedish response to Hurricane Katrina

Hi Tsaddik. Thanks for creating the Swedish response entry - I found it very informative. I'm not sure about the relevance of the image of "snow covered Scandinavia" - I'm not convinced that it's particularly relevant in this context. Do you agree, or do you think it should stay? Regards, CLW 11:14, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! I agree, it was the only (at least semi relevant) image I could find. Appreciate if you (or someone else) would find a better one. If another, better picture, can't be found I guess I can live with no image at all. --Tsaddik Dervish 11:30, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
Yes, I think the new image is much better. (I'd had a quick look for something suitable but with no luck.) CLW 06:43, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi again. Firstly, just to reassure you that it wasn't me operating as a sock puppet who reverted "publically" back to "publicly" again so quickly. "Publicly" genuinely is the accepted standard spelling in both British and American English. The unabridged version of Collins English Dictionary doesn't even list "publically" as an acceptable variant (even though some American dictionaries do reference it as an alternative spelling, but these do confirm that "publicly" is the standard spelling). I therefore strongly believe that "publicly" is preferable.

Also, including the word "the" before Gothenburg-Landvetter Airport is not necessary to differentiate the airport from a different airfield, as the airport is explicitly identified by name. Adding the word "the" most definitely sounds odd, so I think it should go. But please do let me know if you disagree - I won't delete it until you've had a chance to put your side forward!

And I hope you don't take any of my edits as personal attacks - they are only made in the interests of improving the article, and I welcome edits being made to anything I add to Wikipedia! Best regards, CLW 13:10, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

No, it's perfectly allright. For some reason I just like "publically", but you’re right that "publicly" should, most likely, be used since it's more common. I guess I let my pride get in the way when you switched the two words with "sp" listed as the reason. I'll trust you on the "the" part, and have removed it from the sentence. I put it there because I was confused as to where the plane had been, Landvetter all the time, or first Satena (?) air base and then Landvetter. The "the" as in; 'The plane took off from the Heathrow airport and not Gatwick'. But a definite article is probably redundant anyway. Cheers. --Tsaddik Dervish 20:03, 14 September 2005 (UTC)