LPfi

Welcome!

Hello, LPfi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  - Ahunt (talk) 12:38, 4 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

{{tb|Mootros}} {{tb|Mootros}}

Have a look here Talk:Rifleman#Title. You might want to comment. Thanks Mootros (talk) 17:19, 16 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Here are some examples from newspapers where the term is used more or less neutrally: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. While the word pakkoruotsi has negative connotations for most people, it's not because the term as such is derogatory, but because lots of people hate the fact that everybody must learn Swedish. While the supporters of compulsory Swedish may find the term pejorative, lots of people simply think that it's an apt word to describe an odious phenomenon. You can compare this with Nazism, which is used as a neutral term for the ideology of national socialism, even though Nazism was in fact originally a slur and was never used by Hitler et co. themselves. The fact is that pakkoruotsi is not much more popular than Nazism in Finland, which is why it is pretty much the only term used when discussing the topic. Futhermore, often, as in many of the articles linked to above, pakkoruotsi is used as a purely descriptive noun, with no implication that the writer or speaker himself disapproves of compulsory Swedish. See also the article on pejoratives, where it is pointed out that words that start out as pejoratives may become non-pejorative standard words, and that sometimes a word is considered pejorative by some people and not pejorative by others. For these reasons I think it's apt to say that pakkoruotsi is a "somewhat charged term", and not necessarily derogatory.--Victor Chmara (talk) 12:31, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK, I should not have asked for evidence of use, without thinking clearer about what evidence to ask for. I think most of the examples fall in one of three categories:

• The subject of the article is criticism of mandatory Swedish or somebody not liking it
• The user (or the newspaper itself) is critical of mandatory Swedish
• The user tries to keep an informal tone by using non-formal language

I think you could find something like this about "viherpiipertäjä" or similar words (tuo on ehkä hieman yläkanttiin, mutta löytyy HS:stä ja Uudesta Suomesta). They are informal and derogative, but used in mainstream media.

"The term not deregatory, but they hate the fact." This is the problem: by using the term other than a joke, you show what you think about the phenomenon. That means the term is not neutral (somewhat charged is "vähettelyä").

In spite of Godwin's law (you might not know Usenet so it would be unfair to leave the matter) I answer your other point: I think pakkoruotsi has not reached the point where it can be considered neutral. (have to go, will return to the discussion later)

--LPfi (talk) 13:30, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

{{talkback|IngerAlHaosului|ts=09:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)}}

Hi. When you recently edited Languages of Finland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Inari (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) 11:41, 6 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mate (naval officer), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mate and Master (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) 11:04, 30 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

You put in a {{request quotation}} at natural nuclear fission reactor:

Do the articles state that the movements of actinides can be used as reference for nuclear waste deposits, as the wording here and especially in Deep geological repository suggests?

at

Most of the non-volatile fission products and actinides have only moved centimeters in the veins during the last 2 billion years.^{[fission 1]} This offers a case study of how radioactive isotopes migrate through the Earth's crust.^{[fission 2]}

Since I have access to the references in question as well as the pertinent technical knowledge, I could provide quotations. But I'm a bit unclear as to what you want quoted and why: the request reason has little to do with the actual statement in question ("This offers a case study of how radioactive isotopes migrate through the Earth's crust"). As well, the title of the second citation is literally "2 billion year old natural analogs for nuclear waste disposal: the natural nuclear fission reactors in Gabon (Africa)", which seems to answer your actual question. So. If you could attempt to clarify, I can try to fulfill your request!

Cheers.

Kolbasz (talk) 02:20, 2 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

The {{request quotation}} was not quite to the point (I found no better template), so I understand clarification is needed :-)

I am worried that the reference is used to suggest that worries about the safety of proposed deep geological repositories are in fact unnecessary. I would like to know whether the article in fact discusses such implications and whether there in such case are conclusions or opinions that should be included in the articles. If there is no such discussion, I think the fact should be clearly stated, or the statement reworded so that it does not seem to suggest such conclusions.

I understand that there might not be any suitable isolated cite in the article, but it is all too easy to make too broad conclusions based on hard-to-get sources - or make it sound the source implicates such conclusions.

--LPfi (talk) 08:33, 2 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

The request quotation was removed 25 januari 2013: [[Special:Diff/534900435|" Replaced "quotation needed" with a paraphrase of the paper's abstract, from the reference link"]. I hope the paraphrase reflects the true conclusions. –LPfi (talk) 07:38, 17 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Transhumance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sami (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) 11:26, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

In June 2012 you have requested [9] some clarification of comments on fields for lacking data [10] (added in September 2009 by 203.25.165.1), and now I tried to expand the topic a bit. Could you please review my recent contribution (esp. for grammar and clarity)? [11] --CiaPan (talk) 06:25, 28 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the clarification. I think the wording is clear now. --LPfi (talk) 08:00, 28 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm A.Minkowiski. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks!A.Minkowiski (talk) 07:00, 7 April 2014 (UTC) Reply

 

Hello, LPfi. You have new messages at A.Minkowiski's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi LPfi, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of open educational resources (OER) (or open education). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the WIKISOO course and WikiProject Open), my colleague Pete Forsyth and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even heard the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this brief, anonymous survey before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My talk page awaits. Thanks for your support! - Sara FB (talk) 20:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

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) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Doctor (title), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Finnish. 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) 09:43, 23 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stubba, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Laponia. 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) 10:27, 5 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

At Bus, you said you hadn't seen 2 axles buses in years. Are you counting the front axle or just the rear axles? The article counts the front axle. Either way, it still needs a reference, so your edit was good.  Stepho  talk  01:03, 10 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Stepho-wrs: The standard city buses over here have three axles: one in the front, two at the rear. I supposed coaches look the same. If I tried to imagine a two-axle bus, I saw either a historic one, or one refurnished as private vehicle. Now that I check the Finnish Commons category, I see that there are much more quite modern two-axle buses (and coaches) than I thought. I was probably biased by the ones I see in my home town. Still, I'd say three-axle ones might be in majority over here, and saying that two-axle setup is the normal one, one should have a source citing a specific point in time, and either explicitly saying whether the statistics are global or more specific. –LPfi (talk) 06:54, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

In my part of the world (Australia), most buses are 2 axle (1 steer, 1 drive) - with a few being articulated buses with 1 more axle for the back section.

When I lived in Hong Kong it was a mix of 2 and 3 axle double decker buses and lots of Toyota Coaster 2 axle mini buses. And once standing in the back of a flatbed truck with 20 other strangers.

Visits to England was mostly 2 axle double decker buses.

Visits to Europe (Sweden, Germany, Italy) was mostly 2 axle single decker buses. Sad to say, I only spent 1 hour in Finland (Helsinki airport when transiting to Sweden) so I have no idea of Finnish buses.

Visits to Canada and US was a mix of 2 axle city buses and 3 axle coaches but that's just a vague feeling as I wasn't paying much attention to them.

So, yeah, they vary a lot by location.  Stepho  talk  10:12, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Stepho-wrs. I wonder whether there are sources to use for writing something in the article. Perhaps rather than getting a source for the current wording, one could discuss what kind of buses have one or two rear axles. I suppose two rear axles dominating in Turku is due to the low-floor design with the motor in the rear end. –LPfi (talk) 09:09, 14 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I don't have any book references but I do remember something I read a few years back. British buses had strict lengths by law according to the number of axles - extra axles allowed extra length, which allowed more passengers. The 2 axle buses had 4 tyres per axle at the rear. The 3 axle buses had only 2 tyres per axle, which intruded less into the interior and allowed more passengers. So both British types had 4 tyres at the rear but the 3 axle versions could hold more people. But over the years the laws allowed longer lengths until the 2 axle type held enough people. Also, Britain has very tight roads and longer buses can't go around tight corners.

In Kong Kong, the heavier 3 axles buses had trouble going up mountain roads (HK has a lot of mountains), so the 3 axle buses were used on flat routes and the smaller 2 axle buses were used on mountain routes.  Stepho  talk  22:16, 14 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I think we have similar legislation. The typical bus here has the two rear axles below the higher rear department, which means they do not intrude on passenger space (the floor is only a little higher under the affected seats). At least one of the rear axles has four wheels (I think the other hasn't). –LPfi (talk) 07:58, 16 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Finland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ekenäs. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 05:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Fixed. Fixed also the disambiguation page. Odd that the town isn't handled as the primary sense of the name. –LPfi (talk) 12:44, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

 

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

LPfi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is currently 85.76.130.16 (85-76-130-16-nat.elisa-mobile.fi). Whether or not this address has been used as a proxy, it is apparently dynamically assigned to mobile phone data connections by one of Finland's main mobile phone operators. It doesn't seem sensible to block such dynamic addresses (the block was attributed to ‪ST47ProxyBot‬). Personally I have no need for an unblock; I will probably be using another IP when this request gets answered, but others will be hit. LPfi (talk) 17:12, 5 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Decline reason:

This IP address is part of the IPSharkk proxy network. Yamla (talk) 18:25, 5 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

See also User talk:Yamla#"IPSharkk proxy" block. –LPfi (talk) 18:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC)Reply