User talk:Rollo

Grande Arche

Hi there. Nice work on Grande Arche! :) -- Tarquin 11:24, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Soros

Hi. I saw that on User:ChrisO's page you've said that "Edit on Soros/Yugoslav connection makes lots more sense". As I am interested in the topic, could you tell me which edit it was? Nikola 07:37, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I am no expert on this subject. The article was Eduard Shevardnadze, the section about his political downfall. Rollo

Biases and so on

I'd written the following for talk:Vilnius letter, but found it to be too personal and too wordy. I think, if I put it here, you can make rid of it when you've read it (or glanced through it, or whatever...).

"I agree with you, with regard to attribution. I would like to write that I agree very much. With the exception of the first paragraph/section, that in my (personal, of course!) opinion has to be a non-distortive summary of the most important points of the rest of the article. And there, in that summary, there is also little place for the reasoning necessary to interpret the bare words of the declaration. It's actually the same situation with UNSC resolutions and for instance peace treaties. You must first have the knowledge to interpret, before you can make the interpretation, but for many reasons, not the least readability,[1] Wikipedia articles needs a sumarizing introductory paragraph.

"There are however problems with attributions. Chiefly that a summary of generally expressed opinions may be much more informative (or at least information dense) than a long list of quotes that then requires the reader to do the summary himself. But also that governmental aides often comment off the record, which then can not be caught in quotes, but rather in a gradually changed "spirit" of the public debate. And thirdly, that this is Wikipedia, where you can put much effort on a detail, or more, only to see it removed half-a-year later by someone who didn't even realize the effort put into it. I mean: I "can" read Estonian, but in order to make a reference to a statement in Estonian, I must have someone do the translation for me, otherways it wouldn't be reliable. With regard to all other languages of interest here (the rest of the Vilnius ten) I have to rely on second and third hand reports, that aren't useful for quotations.

"I also agree that the article need improvements to get better balanced, but Johan makes a good point. We must remember that also Czech and Bulgarians and French and Iraqis are potential readers, and it's very likely that what appears as "NPOV" for an English speaker appears as rather biased to many non-English readers. Ergo: The English reader must be prepared to face messages and worlds of thoughts that are not totally congruent with their closest surroundings, when the scope of the article is far away. And that's exactly the case for this article.

"With regard to myself, I'm clearly knowing of my own biases. Greatpower invasions remind me much of the Winter War, that is very central to the world view and history understanding one gets if one grews up in a Finnish home. But the US has made quite a few of these, and after three years of studies in political science, I'd no illusions with regard to the military and policing aspects of the invasion. As a student of Arabic, I have of course more access to alternative views, but that doesn't change the fact that I am a Westerner, and that much of the rhetoric surrounding the war was sympathetic to me. The thing I really do dislike with this event, is that it as far as I can judge is in the process of totally disillusioning those pro-Western Muslims and Arabs who were our (Europe's and the US') best hope for a peaceful evolution towards civil rights, democracy, stability and co-existence.

"The diplomatic coersion in connection with the diplomatic "crisis" during the run up to this war, however, were of an unusual magnitude, and are in my opinion very much worth articles in this encyclopedia. In my opinion, the important thing is to report facts without judging. For me, personally, what interests me, and what I consider central for this article, is the paragraph:

"Central European press had pointed out the foreign policy problem their governments faced wasn’t primarily connected with Iraq but with the clash between the regional powers of the European Continent; Russia, France, and Germany on one side, and the Atlantic powers, the United States and the United Kingdom, on the other."

/Tuomas 12:19, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I admire your worldliness. But the fact that you can speak 9 languages doesn't necessarily make you a better judge of right and wrong than (say) George Bush. I don't agree that we should go out of our way to try to 'understand' the way Slovaks/Estonians/Arabs see US foreign policy - at least not for the purpose of this article.

I studied history at university and I am a great believer in the sacredness of fact. A fact cannot be relativised according to culture; it is universal. And I just don't believe it is impossible to separate fact from opinion in this article.

I think I detect a strain of cultural relativism in your views. I live in France so I am fairly familiar with this. A perfectly respectably view of the world, but one I personally just do not accept. Rollo 15:32, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Eh? 9 languages? Obviously my wordiness has served me bad. I'm actually rather disabilited with regards to languages. What I wrote was that the only of the languages spoken by the Vilnius ten that I can read myself is Estonian, and that is "read" with a rather low degree of expertice. You living in France was my guess from your handle, ;-) Gånge Rolf, or Rollo Dane or... — and so far I think your improvements of the article are splendid. /Tuomas 17:06, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you Tuomas for the complimentary remarks among your comments. Having read your user page, I can't resist making a couple of comments. Firstly (and not importantly), you should be aware that writing about oneself in the third person is considered decidedly pretentious in English - the sort of thing monarchs do. Second, I am eternally fascinated by the obsessive anti-Americanism of you Nordic folks. I see all the myriad faults of American society and policy and I am pleased not to be an American myself. But the world is not a warm, fluffy, comfortable place inhabited by rational, cooperative human beings, like Finland. It's dirty, dangerous and chaotic. This is not a pessimistic view, it's realism informed by history. There have always been empires, and into the foreseeable future there will continue to be. America is the world's original popular democracy. It is therefore - despite its unpleasant, violent edge - about as unthreatening as an empire will ever be. It replaced other empires, generally much worse - German, Japanese, Russian, as well as British. It has only lasted fifty years and almost certainly won't last another fifty. Be realistic, consider alternatives. Because unfortunately the world is not going to look like Finland any time soon. Rollo 13:28, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

RER rewrite

Wonderful re-write and reorder of this article, thanks for the effort you put into it! Swarve 23:39, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Swarve, I appreciate that. I haven't finished yet, either! Très cordialement, Rollo 21:47, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

RER stations

You redirected a number of stations into thin air. Were you aware that they had been stubs before they were redirected? Susvolans ⇔ 17:04, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

That would not have been my intention, obviously. More information needed. Rollo 17:38, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Unnecessary cleanup tags on RER Line articles

[Posted to User:Jareth's talk page.] I have removed cleanup tags on four RER Line articles, as done previously by Metropolitan. These seem clearly unjustified, given that the articles in questions are informative, reliable, well-written and reasonably complete. If it is the categorisation which needs "cleaning up", please let this resolve itself, or at least find a way of addressing it without the use of unsightly and misleading banners across the top of the articles. These articles do not need cleaning up. Rollo 18:08, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Not sure why you're telling me, I've never edited any of the articles you mentioned. I did get involved a while back when User:Metropolitan got into an edit war when a cleanup tag was first placed on another article, but I don't know what that would have to do with these. .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 18:12, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

True, you didn't edit any of these articles. Sorry for implying that. But you did write the following on Metropolitan's talk page:

"I noticed you've been removing the cleanup tag from RER A -- please don't. The tag is there so that other editors will be notified that the article needs some work".

...which duly incited Metropolitan to put back all the cleanup tags. Anyway, end of story. The articles are now fine and the tags have gone. Rollo 21:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

CTRL - metric/imperial?

Having recently come across this article it seemed very odd to me that it was still in imperial units, so I've added my vote to it. I'm mentioning it here just so you know that there may be more interest in this discussion. Willkm 21:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Vilnius letter

This article, which you have edited, has been nominated for AfD. Feel free to weigh in with your comments. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 01:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:57, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cinéma du Panthéon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Les Mots (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) 11:08, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Corrected link. --Rollo (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Max Linder Panorama cinema.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Max Linder Panorama cinema.jpg. 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. Stefan2 (talk) 13:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 22:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

File names in articles

Please do not edit the name of files in articles as you did to Architecture of the Paris Métro, it breaks the link to the file. I have corrected the mistake. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

The "Show preview" button is right next to the "Publish changes" button and below the edit summary field.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask on my talk page, or to post at the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Sam Sailor 09:13, 3 September 2018 (UTC) If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|Sam Sailor}} to your message, and signing it.

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Rollo. 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)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Buddhism,_the_Fulfilment_of_Hinduism

Should there be an article about this subject? Please give your opinion here.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 15:08, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:RER sign.jpg

The file File:RER sign.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Paleolithic Diet Talk Page

@Rollo: There are some new conversations at the Paleolithic Diet Talk Page you maybe curious to read. Liberty5651 (talk) 18:50, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)