User talk:Haukurth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Archive 1 — July 24th 2003 - October 12th 2005
• Archive 2 — October 12th 2005 - November 24th 2005
• Archive 3 — November 22nd 2005 - December 29th 2005
• Archive 4 — January 3rd 2006 - February 25th 2006
• Archive 5 — February 26th 2006 - May 31st 2006
• Archive 6 — June 2nd 2006 - August 10th 2006
• Archive 7 — August 10th 2006 - October 3rd 2006
• Archive 8 — October 5th 2006 - January 4th 2007
• Archive 9 — January 5th 2007 - May 19th 2007
• Archive 10 — May 20th 2007 - August 6th 2007
• Archive 11 — August 8th 2007 - December 5th 2007

Contents 1 Thanks indeed 2 All Things Yule & You 3 RfA Thanks 4 Your question... 5 MOS: images 6 Hrynhenda 7 PS: Er Wikipedia fíkn? 8 Er orustan glötuð? 9 Reply 10 Canvassing? 11 A request for your consideration regarding CAT:AOTR 12 Move of Scottish kings 13 Ullr's rings might interest you 14 Translation of Icelandic album titles at "Paul Oscar" 15 Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 3 16 Sognamål 17 An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Greenlandic Norse language, was selected for DYK! 18 Bobby Fischer 19 Faroe Islands 20 Not Laugardalur; Laugardælir 21 February 2008 22 "the complication Sturlunga saga" 23 Iceland referendums 24 Speedy deletion of Template:Myth1 25 Icelandic saga film 26 Request for comment on main page deletion incident 27 Heads-up 28 Template:PD-old-70 29 Could you please remove a useless redirect 30 please show me where 31 Thanks! 32 war / armed conflict 33 Wikipedia:Peer review/Walter de Coventre/archive1 34 Unnotified deletion 35 Why? 36 AfD nomination of Prussian Blue (duo) 37 Hi, I need your help..on a few things. 38 help with overdiagnosis page 39 Rindr 40 Tafl 41 Greenland 42 Identity of [[Image:Ran by Rackham.jpg]] 43 Kari Solmundarson 44 Old Norwegian merge... 45 Midvinterblot 46 Greenland again 47 Election in Iceland 48 Hati Hróðitnisson to Hati Hróðvitnisson 49 Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies/Runes 50 Burma Myanmar 51 Something else entirely 52 Hnefatafl 53 TfD nomination of Template:Possibly-unfree-mural 54 CfD nomination of Category:Possibly unfree murals 55 Speedy

[edit] Thanks indeed

Kœri vinur! Það er hœgt að vera í margs konar klípu, (sorry have no Icelandic script keyboard )and you lent me a hand out of the blue, as I was sinking. For which, heartfelt thanks Með alúðarkveðju Nishidani 17:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Aww, that's very sweet of you. And the Icelandic is flawless, if a bit old-fashioned :) Haukur 17:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] All Things Yule & You

Hello! It's that time of the year again. As you might know, right now there are an amount of subjects relating to Yule that I feel your valuable contributions would greatly assist with. Since these pages will soon see some heavy traffic (and subsequently information derived from them will too), you are most welcome to join me on editing and sourcing these subjects:

• Christmas ham
• Yule goat
• Yule log

Santa-related:

• Santa_Claus#Influence_of_Germanic_paganism_and_folklore

• Talk:Santa_Claus#Germanic_folklore_section_going_bye-bye_soon

There's probably an amount more too. I've passed this on to some other users who I think would be of help in this area also. Again, any help would be appreciated! :bloodofox: (talk) 09:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfA Thanks

[edit] Your question...

Has an answer [1] :)

Apologies for the time taken. I trust you got the note to keep you informed. But it's there now :)

I also noticed that you added a vote to the arb page; that said, I'm not aware that this changes the commitment to answer the question anyhow.

Thanks!

FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 08:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MOS: images

Surely those who specify 300px will see a difference if 280 rather than 240 is specified ... Tony (talk) 01:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes - but I don't know what implications you feel this has. Could you elaborate? My main point is that the vast majority of readers are not logged in and that the vast majority of those who are logged in never change their preferences. The default 180 pixel size is widely felt to be too small for many images - as we can quickly see by browsing through our featured articles. Haukur (talk) 09:21, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hrynhenda

Sjá Hafgerðingadrápu. Það eru að vísu aðeins tvær línur (og rangt kveðnar, þ.e. ofstuðlaðar), en þær eru eldri. Þær koma fyrir, minnir mig í einhverjum af Grænlandstengdu sögunum.

Mínar biðk ek munka reyni

meinalausan faralds beina.

Mig minnir raunar, án þess að nenna að fletta því upp, að línurnar séu fjórar, en hinar man ég í brotum:

Heiðis haldi hárrar foldar

hallar drottinn of mér stalli.

Flettu þessu upp. Ég nenni því ekki í bili.

Gaman að heyra í þér aftur.

Ég er að hugsa um að taka niður tilikynningu um, að búðin sé lokuð.

Kær kveðja Io (talk) 22:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PS: Er Wikipedia fíkn?

Ég lokaði síðunni minni með tilkynningu á henni, ætlaði að taka hálfs árs hlé eða svo, en hefi samt aldrei getað stillt mig um að laumast inn og breytt einhverju smávægilegu. Cheers Io (talk) 23:23, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Er orustan glötuð?

Er orðið ómögulegt að halda nokkurn veginn réttri stafsetningu á því, sem lýtur að fornnorrænu? Eins og Rommel sagði e-n tíma: Maður skal ekki fara í orustu, ef maður græðir ekkert á því að vinna hana.

Þetta eru einhver greindarlegustu orð, sem ég hefi heyrt höfð eftir hershöfðingja.

Kær kveðja Io (talk) 23:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Neinei, ég held að stafsetningin hafi heldur þokast í rétta átt :) Ég er samt ekki jafnduglegur að þrasa í því og ég var. Haukur (talk) 22:37, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

I've posted a belated reply to your question on my talk page. Cheers! Unschool (talk) 07:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Canvassing?

Hey, I'm just trying to get a handle on this canvassing stuff. So I'm soliciting your opinion. The other day, just about the time we were discussing this whole canvassing issue, I got this message on my talk page. Now I've never heard of this editor. The only thing that I can think of that caused him to single me out is that I've edited a few times (over a year ago, if memory serves) to John Roberts. Oh, I might've hit on some of these other pages—the US Supreme Court is a topic of some minor interest to me—but I don't recall. Anyway, so my question is, in your opinion, is this editor engaged in improper canvassing? And if so, how does it compare, in your opinion, to what I did? Just looking to learn, Unschool (talk) 11:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm a bit puzzled why he felt the need to contact so many people over this but when I look at the context I don't really find his effort objectionable. If this had been a long bitter revert-war, fought across multiple articles over a long time, possibly including straw polls, then I think trying to enlist all those people would have been objectionable. But the actual context is that an editor made some changes he didn't like and, instead of just reverting them, he went and argued his case for a revert to multiple third parties. It's certainly an unusual way to conduct business but I wouldn't really call it improper canvassing. Haukur (talk) 12:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Haukur, need some advice. I'm trying to spark a discussion on a policy page, dealing with the style of article leads. I've rarely visited policy pages, but when I have, I find them to be sparsely populated. How can I invite people to participate without violating canvassing guidelines? (As you can imagine, this has been a source of some frustration for me over the past couple of months.) Though we've often disagreed, I still find you to be one of the most knowledgeable people I've encountered on the project. Unschool (talk) 02:53, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A request for your consideration regarding CAT:AOTR

Hello fellow Wikipedia administrators open to recall category member!

I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach. But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole. I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though. But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment. Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version. Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled. I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes. Larry Pieniazek NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Wikipedia administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you.

...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "F"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "G"s, and "H"s! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. ++Lar: t/c 20:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Move of Scottish kings

There is a proposed move of Scottish kings at Talk:Kenneth I of Scotland that I thought I'd bring to your attention. I think you have had things to say on this subject in the past. Probably won't be successful, but that's wiki for you. Best regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 17:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I already saw it. I see you're contacting a number of people - you may want to make sure that you're compliant with WP:CANVASS. Haukur (talk) 17:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I contacted people irrespective of what I'd suspect they'd vote for, if that counts. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 17:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

That does count. Haukur (talk) 17:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

A move has been started on Hugh FitzKenneth of the Scots and the Picts. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ullr's rings might interest you

Hi Haukur! As you wrote once in Ullr, Atlakviða talks of swearing oaths by "Ullr's ring". Swedish archaeologists are excavating a place called Lilla Ullevi ("little shrine of Ullr") and they have discovered many small "amulet rings" which they connect to the swearing of oaths by Ullr's ring.[2] I thought it might interest you to see another piece of eddic information supported by modern archaeology.--Berig (talk) 18:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that is quite interesting. Thank you! Would be nice to see a photo of that stone platform they're talking about. Haukur (talk) 19:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I think that the stone platform is the mass of stones that you see in the article's picture.--Berig (talk) 19:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I must be the least observant man alive! I didn't even notice that the article had a picture. But, yes, clearly, this is the stone platform with the two "arms". Very nice! Haukur (talk) 20:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Translation of Icelandic album titles at "Paul Oscar"

Hi, thanks very much for the barnstar! If you've got time and the inclination, there are still some Icelandic album titles over at "Paul Oscar" that need translation into English. See "Talk:Paul Oscar#Help with new article "Paul Oscar"" (though the article is not so new any more). Happy new year! — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 14:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 3

Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate, that landed on WP:100! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because of the holidays and all the off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks again, and have a great new year, --Elonka 18:21, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sognamål

Now that was a quick edit... ;) It is good to see that there are other users that are interested in it too though. Are you sure it isn't older? Like I wrote in the talk page afterwards, in Sognamål it is blaur/blaor/blár (however you choose to write it). As you pointed out it is the same in Modern Icelandic, but it is also the same in Old Norse.[3] I thought this was an older form that was retained in Icelandic and Sognamål, but that had evolved into "å" in most of the modern spoken Norwegian? -- Nidator ^{T / C} 13:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

It's spelled the same in standardized Old Norse and Modern Icelandic (and Faroese) but that doesn't mean it was pronounced the same. Originally /á/ was a long version of /a/. In Icelandic, Faroese and Sognamål it developed into a diphthong. In most mainland Scandinavian dialects it developed into something else. Haukur (talk) 14:51, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, there you go; A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Then I have a suggestion for an alternative wording:

"One of the most prominent features of Sognamål is the pronunciation "ao" instead of "å" in many words, similar to Modern Icelandic and Faroese."

That should be correct then. While I have your ear, or eyes rather, I have a question. I'm going to write a letter to an Icelander and wondering if the average Icelander would have any problems understanding it if I used conservative nynorsk. What do you think? -- Nidator ^{T / C} 15:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The Faroese diphthong is actually different, more like "oa" than "ao" in this very loose transcription. As for conservative nynorsk, do you mean like "Eg hev boki med visone"? I don't know. Someone who is interested in languages or good at one of the mainland Scandinavian languages will probably be fine. But some people don't really like trying to puzzle out something they don't quite understand and find even Faroese to be too burdensome. Most Icelanders are most familiar with Danish and have little or no exposure to nynorsk. The thing I found most confusing about nynorsk before I learned the grammar were the words with definitive articles without -n (boki, visa etc.) It's not really intuitive for an Icelander that "vise" is a word without article and "visa" is a word with article - in cases like that Danish or conservative bokmål is probably easier, even if nynorsk (and radical bokmål) are, of course, closer to Icelandic in actually distinguishing masculine and feminine nouns. Haukur (talk) 15:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll skip the reference to Faroese then. Yes, it was something like that I had in mind, even though being from Trøndelag I usually write quite a bit closer to the infamous samnorsk. I thought it might be easier for an Icelander to understand as it is closer to Icelandic, but I had forgotten that you learn Danish in school. If that is the most troublesome aspect though I could always write "bokin" and "visan" instead. I'm not sure I could bring myself to writing riksmål... hehe -- Nidator ^{T / C} 15:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh, sure - you can always invent your own Norwegian, it seems plenty of other people have :) Haukur (talk) 15:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, Norwegian is such a wide continuum of spoken and written language that you have an almost infinite number of permutations, especially now that it has become very common to just write your dialect informally. I'm not sure you'll find "bokin" anywhere though, at least not in this day and age. Anyway, thanks for the advice. I'm sure I'll figure it out. -- Nidator ^{T / C} 16:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

What you wrote about the nouns made me curious, so I decided to look up the older writing norms and it turns out that in Ivar Aasen's Norwegian writing norm of 1864, which is now most commonly referred to as høgnorsk (High Norwegian), the -n is indeed there, albeit optional.

Visa - Visa(n) - Visor - Visorna

Skaal - Skaali(n) - Skaaler - Skaalerna

Surprisingly, to me at least, it also contains plurals for verbs. I hope I'm not boring you with this. :) -- Nidator ^{T / C} 22:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

No, I think it's quite interesting! I didn't know Aasen had an optional -n there. Fairly close to Swedish there (and, of course, to Old Norse). Haukur (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Verbal plurals were the norm in written Danish at the time, weren't they? "Han er / de ere". Haukur (talk) 23:19, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I also noticed the similarity with Swedish. That norm really is very conservative compared even to the most conservative end of current official nynorsk. Much more so than I was aware of. A reform is under way for nynorsk, by the way. I don't know quite what it will entail, but it is expected to remove both the most conservative and the most centric forms. I believe you are correct with regards to Danish. In, for example, Henrik Wergeland's "Vi ere en Nation, vi med" you have examples of both. -- Nidator ^{T / C} 00:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Greenlandic Norse language, was selected for DYK!

On January 16, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Greenlandic Norse language, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 16:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, this is very interesting. I had been wondering if there was any information on whether or not the Old West Norse language in Greenland had evolved into a separate Greenlandic language. Thank you for taking the time to make this article, Haukurth. -- Nidator ^{T / C} 07:10, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bobby Fischer

It is entirely proper, and recommended, that a tag be put on an article in order to complete editing which takes more than two minutes to complete, especially when intervening editors bar the completion. It is not inappropriate, and in fact, is rude, to continue to edit over that tag. If others would take time out to allow the completion of the edit, and the person who placed can then remove it, a lot of time would be saved. I don't know to what "cases like that this" you are referring, but to remove it and continue to edit over it is rude and inappropriate. Wildhartlivie (talk) 15:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

It's a nice tag for relatively low traffic articles which two or three people are working actively on and don't want to trip each other up. It's useless for a high traffic in-the-news article - most people won't notice it, many are noobs, and some people will just ignore it. Many people want to add their two cents to the article now and there are bad edits to revert. Just practically speaking, that tag isn't going to do any good. Haukur (talk) 15:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Faroe Islands

Thanks for adding the results! So, there'll be a new, separatist government, then, as the separatists have a total of seventeen seats? Or are there other differences between them which are more important at the moment than independence or unionism (I've heard something about LGBT rights being an issue right now)? —Nightstallion 00:19, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I watched a panel discussion with the party leaders on ru.fo. The opposition pointed out that they had gained and the government had lost, showing that the people wanted change. The government leaders pointed out that the government still had a large majority and was entirely viable for continuing. All options are on the table but the leaders of the present ruling parties will start by discussing a possible continuation of the government.

There are certainly more issues than independence to be considered though it is still the single most important issue. Also note that Miðflokkurin had a big victory and they're basically a Christianist party, somewhat outside of the old battle lines. Haukur (talk) 00:27, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you be so kind as to tell me when new developments occur regarding the new government? Thanks! —Nightstallion 10:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Certainly! Haukur (talk) 11:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Not Laugardalur; Laugardælir

I think the interwiki link was correct, based on articles on the Internet. See the Chessbase article and spelling used. Chessy999 (talk) 13:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's certainly not Laugardalur in Reykjavík - there is another Laugardalur. But the farm is called Laugardælir and the church is Laugardælir Church. Haukur (talk) 13:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

To clarify, I believe Laugardælir is in Laugardalur so both are correct. But that Laugardalur is not the same as the Laugardalur in Reykjavík. Haukur (talk) 14:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

When moving pages, as you did to Njál's saga, please remember to fix any double redirects. These can create slow, unpleasant experiences for the reader, waste server resources, and make the navigational structure of the site confusing. Specifically, when you moved this article to Njals saga, you created several double redirects as a result of pages which were redirects to the old title. I've fixed these myself, but just thought I'd let you know so you know to watch out for it in future. Thanks for reading. Terraxos (talk) 03:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way - can I suggest making a new archive of your Talk page? It's over 170KB long, making it rather slow and painful for me to edit. It's generally recommended that any page should be archived when it gets longer than 100KB. Terraxos (talk) 03:29, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "the complication Sturlunga saga"

Well spotted! A Freudian slip if ever there was one ;-) Dependent Variable (talk) 18:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Iceland referendums

Hello Haukurth. I saw you made some edits to the 1944 referendum article I started. However, I also added a 1918 election to the template. Did this actually happen? One source makes reference to it in passing, but I can't find any other evidence whatsoever.

Also, do you know where I could find a list of pre-1946 elections?

Cheers, пﮟოьεԻ 57 12:37, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

There certainly was a referendum in 1918, where the Act of Union was approved with a large margin. Turnout was low, though.

For a list of Icelandic referenda see is:Þjóðaratkvæðagreiðsla. For a list of Althing elections see is:Alþingiskosningar. For a list of municipal elections see is:Sveitarstjórnarkosningar á Íslandi. Haukur (talk) 12:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

here is a breakdown of the results. The numbers from Vestur-Skaftafellssýsla and Norður-Múlasýsla were still not in at this point. Haukur (talk) 13:00, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks for that. I can't read Icelandic, so could you tell me what the referendums were on (so I can add them to Template:Icelandic elections)? Also, does "Aukakosningar" mean by-election? I notice that the results in the Icelandic wikipedia are different to those quoted in Icelandic referendum, 1944... пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I've managed to translate all of the stuff except "þegnskylduvinnu"... пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, by-elections. One reason results may be superficially different is that sometimes the figures are quoted with the invalid and blank votes thrown out. As for the referenda; the 1908 one was on prohibition (which was fairly narrowly approved). The 1916 one was on mandatory community service (went down like a lead balloon). The 1933 one (missing in this list) abolished prohibition (again fairly narrowly) and the others we've discussed. Haukur (talk) 13:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Community service - what was that? пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Like conscription but without a military. It was intended for all males aged 17-25. Maybe there's a better English word. Haukur (talk) 13:27, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

National service? Haukur (talk) 13:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

No, I think community service is the right phrase to use (national service is generally a militaristic term in English) - this is how the same thing is called in Germany.[4] Thanks a lot for your help. пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, that's fine, then. I think you've got almost all the national elections by now. I think there may have been a special election for the National Assembly, though. Haukur (talk) 13:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Would that have been in 1848? Also, I agree with your removal of the non-elections from the template. If there was no vote, then there's no point in an article. пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know when it was and I'm unable to quickly find out. But there was one. Haukur (talk) 14:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:Myth1

A tag has been placed on Template:Myth1 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I deleted it. Haukur (talk) 07:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Icelandic saga film

I saw a short clip a while back of what looked to be a pretty recent Icelandic saga film. It was of a man who fought several people with a spear in open terrain in Iceland. The sequence was very fluid, and almost Asian in its choreography. Do you know which saga/film it was? -- Nidator ^{T / C} 11:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I'm afraid I don't! But then I'm not really a movie buff. Might try asking at the ice-project or our Wikipedia. Haukur (talk) 16:11, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for comment on main page deletion incident

As you made an edit to the incident listed in the Administrators notice board, it is requested that you confirm the details of the incident here (section 1.1.2)

This is as the incident is used as the basis of an argument and needs to be confirm by persons familar with the event

Regards --User:Mitrebox talk 2008-02-22 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.11.244.78 (talk) 08:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Heads-up

Hiya, it looks like you weren't formally notified of this, and it's not a huge deal, but I wanted to make you aware that your name has come up (briefly) at a recent ArbCom case. Whether or not you participate is entirely up to you, but if you'd like to follow along: [5] (and related evidence page). FYI, --Elonka 18:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:PD-old-70

I noticed that a while ago you changed it to say that there were other requirements for United States public domain, besides being more than 70 years past the Author's death. According to Cornell's Copyright expiration page there are no other requirements: unpublished works "from authors who died before 1938" are public domain in the U.S. as of 1 January 2008. What additional requirements were you referring to? I can't find any. Unless you can find a reputable legal source that contradicts or elaborates on the Cornell site I think the template should be altered to say that works by an author who died 70 years ago or more are in the public domain in the U.S. but may not be in other countries. --TexasDex ★ 02:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The key word there is 'unpublished'. Very few of the works relevant to us are unpublished. Haukur (talk) 08:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

If I may chime in here... in Switzerland, where I live, as well as in Germany and many other countries, copyright expires clearly 70 years after the author's death if the work was published when the author lived. The only problematic works here are unpublished ones: the publishers of those may gain an extra protection in some countries after the first publication (editio princeps, 25 years in Germany). I.e. if an archive publishes something by an author even dead since several hundred years for the first time, it may have editio princeps rights, but everything already published by an author who died in 1937 or earlier is completely free in continental Europe. As it seems here, it may be the other way round in the USA? Gestumblindi (talk) 18:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's like that in most of Europe. The US has more complicated rules, check the chart above. Publication years are important and copyright registration can come into play. Haukur (talk) 19:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

AFAIK, Switzerland does not have the publication right. Where in SR 231.1 is it? Lupo 19:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

You are right, Switzerland doesn't have it. Germany, however, does. I was talking about European countries in general and included Germany with its editio princeps law as an example. My point was the clear freeness of everything published at the lifetime of an author who died more then 70 years ago in most of Europe which makes it seem ironic that in some cases it is the opposite in the US: under editio princeps, a work by an author who died more than 70 years ago but which is for the first time published now may be protected in e.g. Germany for 25 years, but not protected in the USA exactly because it was not published when the author lived, but it could be protected in the USA if it were published then (between 1923 and 1937), and not protected in Germany. ;-) Gestumblindi (talk) 19:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Could you please remove a useless redirect

Hi Haukur, I have discovered a redirect which probably is a typo of mine: Uppland Runic Inscription 195. Could you, please, delete it?--Berig (talk) 10:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing! Haukur (talk) 14:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!--Berig (talk) 14:28, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] please show me where

There is a word "definition" on the page WP:CONSENSUS?--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 14:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I never said there'd be one. Haukur (talk) 14:43, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't accept non-English communication in an English talk page. Its uncivil, and seeks to score a point. In English Mu is the sound made by cows, pronounced Moooooo.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 15:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

...for fixing my spelling! [6] --Stephan Schulz (talk) 18:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] war / armed conflict

Hi.

I don't think "armed conflict," which became a phrase during the twentieth century, need be cast into old descriptions of ancient wars...If you have a better notion, please tell me...and I'll think myself and try to remember what the classical English word for "a series of skirmishes" was...--VKokielov (talk) 04:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind the anachronism but in any case it's "major war" that I thought sounded off, "war" by itself wouldn't be too bad. Haukur (talk) 09:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, well, it used to be "major armed conflict..." --VKokielov (talk) 16:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Peer review/Walter de Coventre/archive1

Hi there. I listed Walter de Coventre for review, and since you have FA experience in medieval articles I thought you may not be totally unwilling to say one thing or another. I appreciate the content may not be very interesting to you, but no suggestion would be unwelcome. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 10:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unnotified deletion

Hi Haukur, could you check out who deleted Image:Hrolfr Kraki sows the seeds of the fyris wolds.jpg without leaving any explanation?--Berig (talk) 14:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean Image:Hrolfr kraki sows the seeds of the fyris wolds.jpg (small k in Kraki) which you uploaded in January? I can't see any deletions of these images, maybe I'm missing something. Haukur (talk) 15:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Duh! Sometimes, I am stupid. Someone had vandalised the page[7], so that it looked as if the image had been deleted.--Berig (talk) 15:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, no problem :) Should I delete the duplicate? Haukur (talk) 15:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please go ahead! :)--Berig (talk) 15:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why?

In your recent reversion on NC why in the world would someone of your experience leave a cryptic summary, instead of, oh, i dunno, using the revert function to label it appropriately, or using undo to do so while adding your sarcasm?
--Jerzy•t 16:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't quite follow. I think the revert function is mostly intended for vandalism and I wasn't reverting vandalism, I was reverting a change I didn't understand and didn't see the author justify. That's why I asked: Why? Was that too terse? Haukur (talk) 16:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Prussian Blue (duo)

An editor has nominated Prussian Blue (duo), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prussian Blue (duo) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:00, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hi, I need your help..on a few things.

Hello. I'm Dane. I think I need your assistance as both an Admin, and a Legendary Saga expert.

Uh, for the Saga's I created a page for Egil One-Hand and Asmund Berserkers-Slayer, neither of which is finished and I also plan to update the information on the Egils saga einhenda ok Ásmundar berserkjabana, as there is not much at the moment. My problem is outside of the translated texts, there is nearly nothing on the Saga or the manuscript in English, no notable 3rd party sources that expand upon the importance of nobility of the text it self. Also the Saga's page mentions, "Asmund is also known as Gnodar-Asmund and under this name he is mentioned in various other sagas. His foster-father was Illugi, Foster-Son of Grid." This information is nowhere listed in the story I have about Egil and Asmund, and perhaps you chould steer me towards sagas in which include Gnodar-Asmund, and explain how he is the same person as Asmund Beserkers-Slayer.

I am hoping to add information on other Legendary Saga's as well, but I still am very new to Wikipedia and trying to get a handle on things...

Which where my other issue comes into play. For my Egil One-Hand page, I uploaded an image I drew a little while ago. It's nothing special, but i felt having an image was nice for the page and you got to see his Sword-Arm. However there is currently a vote to remove it... I wouldn't have too much of a problem with that, except that the person trying to remove I feel is doing it for biased reasons towards me. An Administrator called Future Perfect, or Fut.Per or somethingFut.Perf.. He was invovled in a recent altercation with me and my friends in which we were banned as sock-puppets prior to the use of a checkuser (Future Perfect was more willing to believe the word of someone who was a sock puppet and had a vendetta against my friends, then us.)

I feel Future Perfect is out to get me. He has twice removed the image of Egil One-Hand without posting anything in the discussion page, and only when i made a post on his talk page did he respond, in which he seemed very condescending. Further more, Future Perfect was easily led by a sock-puppet using member to get me and my innocent friends blocked. I am new here I don't know how things work, but I feel very wronged and am very upset. I attempted to confront him on his talk page about it, and all he did was call me a troll. Which I do not believe is the least bit true.

I don't know if there is anything that can be done, but he infuriates me, especially since he seems to have taken the attitude in which he wrongfully attacked me and my friends, and continued to use it against my image of Egil One-Hand.

On the image, I'd like you to look it at and decide if it should be there or not. I respect your opinion, and if you agree it just doesn't belong, I'll cheerfully remove it.

Link to the article for deletion discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2008_March_13#Image:Egilonehand.jpg

And any extra help you can lend on the Legendary Saga's would be most useful. Sorry to be so overwhelming. ShieldDane (talk) 09:44, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not a saga I've read, I'm afraid. I'll let you know if I come across something. Haukur (talk) 23:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] help with overdiagnosis page

I appreciate your help in editing the overdiagnosis page. I re-edited the placement of the figures to correspond with the text. Please let me know if there is a specific reason that the placement of these figures is inappropriate and I will change the text to properly reference the figures. Thanks again. I truly believe this is an important addition to the Wikipedia database. Hgwelch (talk) 12:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. I suggest keeping any further discussion there for simplicity. Haukur (talk) 16:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rindr

Hello Haukurth, in 2006 you commented on the naming on the Rindr/Rinda articles. I came across them because the article on tuple space links there, since it is also the name of a Linda version in Ruby. So I moved them around a bit, adding Rinda (disambiguation). Since you noted that there is a difference between the character of Rinda in the Eddas and Gesta Danorum, this might be chance to elaborate even further. Tierlieb (talk) 08:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tafl

Thanks for the pointer on the Old Norse pronunciation of Tafl. I have found a credible source, and I corrected and sourced the IPA entry in the Tafl games article. I'll look for you the next time I have a question on Germanic languages (and I'm sure I will have many). Takk fyrir! Wilhelm meis (talk) 23:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's a question for you: I have seen "kvatrutafl" identified as backgammon. Is this accurate, and do you know any good sources of information about kvatrutafl (or about backgammon in medieval Iceland and Scandinavia)? Wilhelm meis (talk) 16:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Sturlunga saga and, I think, the bishops' sagas mention kvátra or kvátrutafl. See also de:Kotra. That's about all I know. Haukur (talk) 10:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Greenland

Hi! Any details yet on Greenlandic self-government referendum, 2008? —Nightstallion 23:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Not really. Some progress on the oil question.[8] Some chatter about full independence in 2016.[9] No details on the referendum itself. The upcoming municipal election is getting most of the attention at the moment.[10] Haukur (talk) 01:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! —Nightstallion 02:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Identity of [[Image:Ran by Rackham.jpg]]

Hey Haukurth, I noticed that you have this image labeled as "Rán by Arthur Rackham (1911)". However, I have an Arthur Rackham collection (The Arthur Rackham Treasury, page 33. ISBN 0486446859) that includes this plate and that states that it is a depiction of one of Aesop's Fables and includes the caption The Shipwrecked Man and the Sea. Do you have a conflicting source? :bloodofox: (talk) 12:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

This is actually quite typical and very annoying. My original upload/edit contained my source. Since then, the image has been uploaded to the Commons, without the source information, and deleted here, against policy and good sense. The Commons version doesn't have my original source information so it can only be accessed via my original deleted edits and since you can't see those the trail is cold. Anyway, this was my source: http://www.timelessmyths.com/norse/aesir.html I always wondered how the artist had come up with this idea of Rán. An excellent explanation is the one you have supplied - this wasn't meant to be Rán. I envy you for having that book, though :) Haukur (talk) 13:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I thought I might just bring it up as I always liked the image and wondered what Rackham's basis for depicting Rán this way was myself. Well, now we both know! :bloodofox: (talk) 09:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kari Solmundarson

Started a new article on this fellow. Feel free to expand as you see fit. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 18:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Kudos on that! I'm afraid I've never been a big Njála expert, though. Such a byzantine story! :) Haukur (talk) 08:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Old Norwegian merge...

I put this in that discussion, but I would like your input on it and nobody seems to read or respond to that talk ATM.

I thought of something that might make more people happy than the proposed merge would. Why not cut Old Norse down a bit (it's extremely long, 40kb is long in wikipedia, this is 50% more than that) by making an article "Old Norse Languages" in which Old Icelandic, Old Norwegian, Old Danish, Old Swedish and Old Gnutish can be treated together, separate from the "common norse" but still handled together, so that the developments can be related to each other. That article should then heavily refer to the known documents of these languages, and should draw up the ways that differences and similarities line up, because they do not always follow that East Norse/West Norse split. A large amount of prose can be lifted straight from Old Norse and Old Norwegian can then be merged to the new article. This also allows for the handling of the "middle norwegian" and the other medieval norse languages because the term "Old Norse Languages" can arguably apply also to medieval forms whether they are called "Old" or "Middle" or whatever. Please let me know what you think. I personally feel that this would be a good compromise. I also think my proposed article will be a lot easier to write than the Old Norwegian article has shown itself to be (see that article's talk page for my critique) because the changes can be related to those of the other languages, everything can be put into it's true context.--AkselGerner (talk) 23:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

What do you think? Old Greenlandic can go straight in there too, if you want, but maybe you don't. Anyway I would like to apologize for bungling the whole thing by being too aggressive. I do believe my criticisms of Old Norwegian are justified though, and that handling all the languages in parallel will be easier, or at least more meaningful.--AkselGerner (talk) 23:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not that you're wrong or rude or anything and maybe I'm just conservative but I don't quite like the title "Old Norse languages". That terminology is not something I'm familiar with and Wikipedia tries to stay with the most common terms and the most common ways of presenting information. When I search for "Old Norse languages" on Google Books I mostly get phrases like "Icelandic and Old Norse languages" which seems to parse as "[[Icelandic] and [Old Norse]] languages" rather than as "[Icelandic] and [Old Norse languages]". Haukur (talk) 10:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand, of course there's no such conventional term, but I think wiki is allowed to use normal english analytic semantics, old + norse + languages = old forms of descendants of Norse language, but of course, then it should be "norse", non-capitalized. The specific name is just a start-off suggestion. It is difficult to think of a different way to refer to old icelandic, old norwegian, old danish, old swedish etc. than by a plural/conglomerate/collective moniker like "old x languages", at least for me. I'm not trying to own this in any way, so if you have a better idea, feel free to say. Of course, a more conventional term would be "old scandinavian languages" or "old north-germanic languages" , but these then deviate from the already existing trend to favor the "Norse" naming, and aren't all that much clearer. As I said, it's not easy to come up with a common name for these languages, also because these languages are referred to specifically when wanting to take focus from the commonalities between the languages and put it in the differences, and also for placing them in a national context, again highlighting their differences.--AkselGerner (talk) 20:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Midvinterblot

Hi Haukur! Since you often edit Norse mythology articles and can read and write in Swedish, would you like to help out with verifying two minor translations on Talk:Midvinterblot? User:Redtigerxyz is evaluating it for GA and would like a second opinion on the translation of two statements.--Berig (talk) 07:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Greenland again

Hi! I found two links about the issue, but I'm not sure I understand what this actually means, so it'd be great if you could update the article with the events (and explain to me whether this means "more autonomy" or "independence" or "more autonomy and independence soon" or whatever). Thanks a lot! —Nightstallion 13:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I think this is probably about as confusing to me as you. But if there's any particular Danish text you think might throw light on the matter I'll summarize it for you. Haukur (talk) 17:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

No, nothing in specific... Still, could you update the article on the referendum? I think you're less likely to confuse matters than I would be... —Nightstallion 18:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and a question about Iceland, if you should know something about that: How likely is it that Icelandic politicians will be pressured to join the EU in the next one or two years? I've read that due to the financial crisis, the public is now strongly supportive of EU entry... —Nightstallion 17:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I would estimate them as very low. During the last election the Social Democratic Alliance was the only party to run on a pro-EU platform. This means that only 18 of the 63 members of parliament were elected on that basis. I think the current parliament doesn't believe that it has a mandate to apply for EU membership. We would really need new elections first. Those aren't scheduled until 2011. Conceivably one of the other parties might make EU membership a part of their platform in those elections but due to the history and structure of the Icelandic party system it's hard to see which one. I would be inclined to rule out the Left-Green Movement. The Independence Party has, of late, some pro-EU elements but also very strong anti-EU elements. Conceivably the party might split over the issue. It has split before. Elections might conceivably be called before 2011 but I don't think it's likely.

So, EU application within two years? Not likely at all. Within 10 years? Possibly. Would it be approved in a referendum? Possibly, but it could certainly go either way. Haukur (talk) 17:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Mh. Strange, I've heard that there's *strong* public support now, so I'd expect it to become an election issue the next time... Thanks for your analysis! —Nightstallion 18:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Recent polls have shown an upswing in public support for it. It's been an election issue for more than a decade now, it may be an important election issue next time. Haukur (talk) 19:23, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

nods Thanks for the info! —Nightstallion 09:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Election in Iceland

According to Republic NZ, the nominations have closed -- are there other candidates, or is this a non-election again? —Nightstallion 20:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I thought potential nominees still had until the end of next week to turn in the signatures. But I'm not aware of any. Looks like it could indeed be a non-election. Haukur (talk) 23:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the law is clear: http://www.althingi.is/lagas/nuna/1945036.html The elections are to take place on the last Saturday of June and candidates have until five weeks before that to turn in the paperwork. Haukur (talk) 23:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, okay. nods What is required to stand in the election, BTW? —Nightstallion 10:36, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Someone's corrected him. —Nightstallion 10:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

You need to be at least 35 years old, be an Icelandic citizen and to have the recommendations (signatures) of at least 1500 people with the right to vote. Haukur (talk) 11:25, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

nods And, do you think anyone will file to contest the election? —Nightstallion 14:06, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

No, I don't think anyone will. Collecting the signatures is a non-trivial task and if anyone was doing it it would be generally known. Haukur (talk) 14:28, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. We'll definitely know in a week, either way. —Nightstallion 20:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

So it's a non-election? —Nightstallion 08:17, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. That has now been confirmed.[11] Ólafur Ragnar gets another term without an election. He will be inaugurated for his fourth term on August 1st. Haukur (talk) 09:25, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hati Hróðitnisson to Hati Hróðvitnisson

Thanks for the catch! :) :bloodofox: (talk) 17:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies/Runes

Hi Haukur. There are nowadays several editors who work on runic articles, so I have started a work group. I thought you might be interested in having a look at it.--Berig (talk) 17:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Burma Myanmar

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Nichalp's move of Burma to Myanmar and my posting to Talk:Myanmar#Move back to Burma, but I would rather an uninvolved administrator did it for me. Would you oblige to you if you would move the page back to Burma, as the clear position is that there was a WP:RM back in September 2007 (see Talk:Myanmar/Archive 3#Requested_move) to move the page to Burma, and several subsequent requested moves to move it back Myanmar failed (see Talk:Myanmar/Archive 4#October requested move and a couple on Talk:Myanmar/Archive 5). --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 12:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow, what a mess. I appreciate your confidence in me but I'm very reluctant to take action here, especially after User:Jonny-mt applied protection today. He says he's uninvolved and apparently he decided to freeze things down. Personally I agree with you that there was no consensus for a move. (Though I should note that I have no idea if the move to Burma last year had consensus either.) Haukur (talk) 13:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Luckily we do not have to decide whether there was a consensus last year or not because the closing admin made that call :-) But see Talk:Myanmar#Move back to Burma the problem is solved (for the time being) as user:Nichalp gave his/her consent to move it back, and so I did it. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 18:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Something else entirely

We're about to switch to a new upload form at the Commons; details at commons:Commons:Village pump#New upload form. What do you think? We could use some help with translating the form's labels, error messages, and help texts to Danish and also to Icelandic. Can you help? Lupo 14:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

(P.S.: noticed recently that Björn has found its way into the Icelandic WP now... :-) Lupo 14:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I saw Björn too. Articles in five languages now, not bad! The form looks like it will help encourage more informative uploads, something sorely needed. I'm sorry that I don't have the time commitment to Wikipedia at the moment to comment beyond that. Haukur (talk) 23:31, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hnefatafl

I was discussing with Berig, and he told me that as far as he knew "raichi" - used to indicate impending victory like "check" in chess - was a word of Saami derivation and that the Viking Age Norse would have used a Norse equivalent. He didn't know what that would have been but he suggested you might. Any idea? Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I'm afraid I have no idea. Haukur (talk) 14:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Possibly-unfree-mural

Template:Possibly-unfree-mural has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 05:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Possibly unfree murals

I have nominated Category:Possibly unfree murals (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 05:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy

Hi Haukur, could you please delete these images that I have uploaded to commons: Image:U 1087, Lövsta.jpg‎, Image:U 217, Vallentuna.jpg, Image:U 582, Söderby-Karl.jpg, Image:U 698, Veckholm.jpg, Image:U 346, Frösunda.jpg‎, Image:U 366, Gådersta.jpg,‎ Image:U 283, Torsåker.jpg, Image:U 363, Gådersta.jpg,‎ Image:U 349, Odenslunda.jpg, Image:U 349, Odenslunda.jpg‎, Image:U 446, Droppsta.jpg‎, Image:U 270, Smedby.jpg.--Berig (talk) 15:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)