User talk:Jähmefyysikko

June 2024

Hello again! You've been very busy fixing names the way you want them. But here, and with a few other redirects, haven't you created a mess? I cannot find it helpful that a redirect which once helpfully was for the disambiguation of various Swedish royal women by the same name now, confused, goes to an article about the name, not about any of them. Could you please try to be less sloppy and/or rushed, and perhaps less headstrong, when doing such work? SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

If you think these moves are not based on the naming policy, then challenge them.

And no, I don't think I've made a mess: the target page is quite short and contains the same list of names, so the navigation hasn't suffered. But I admit that I have yet to internalize all the intricacies of the human dab pages and similar pages, so I am open to suggestions. However, there is another issue here which I did not previously consider: The primary topic for Ingegerd of Sweden/Ingegärd of Sweden seems to be Ingegerd Olofsdotter of Sweden so both of these names should be redirected there. Do you agree? All the results at Google Books are about her. I don't see any evidence that any of the other women would have been referred to as "Ingegerd of Sweden", so the dab page doesn't seem necessary. (Btw, This thread should have been opened on the article talk page.)

And I believe I would appear less headstrong to you in these discussions if you based your arguments on commonly accepted policies/guidelines, and not just on opinions which in WP carry zero weight.

Also, while we are discussing: Here you gave sources, but they don't seem to contain the claimed information at all. What am I to make out of that? Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

This, again, is about your behavior as decribed in general terms - disrupting a redirect which once helpfully was for the disambiguation of various Swedish royal women by the same name now, confused, goes to an article about the name, not about any of them. This is not about article content. Feel free to continue to ignore your behavior issue (which will only worsen it) and move most of this to article talk. There I may choose to reply if I think there's any chance of reaching someone who wants to totally trash the academic contents of a history book preface by Dr. Ulf Sundberg. Others might also try to get through to you. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I've now redirected those pages to Ingegerd Olofsdotter of Sweden per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. If you think a dab page is also needed, the onus is on you to provide evidence that there are other Ingegerds of Sweden. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 18:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

A comment on the above: By ”total trashing” Serge might mean the change (diff)

• from: Making extensive use of donations from 2016 on, by the National Museum of Sweden to Wikimedia Commons, and crediting that museum for them, a new full color edition called Centuries of Selfies was published in 2020 with a preface by Ulf Sundberg.
• to: A new full color edition called Centuries of Selfies was published in 2020 with a preface by Ulf Sundberg. It is illustrated with images that the National Museum of Sweden released to Wikimedia Commons in 2016.

I find the first one quite pompous. Or do you mean something else? Jähmefyysikko (talk) 19:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I think you’re referring to the fact that I don’t agree that Demitz’ claims should be attributed to Sundberg. But why should they be? He only wrote the preface, not the rest of the book. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:05, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Sundberg is an academic historian. If you think the preface he wrote indicates that he didn't carefully review the entire contents of the book especially its full 7 A4-small-print pages of bibliography, before he would want to write it and word it as he did, that is not only so wrong, it goes to show your non-NPOV attitude. Equals trashing him and his words. Boomerangs on you. Disrespectful behavior we don't want on WP. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 19:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Sundberg's preface in its entirety (in case you have trashed him & the book without ever seeing it):

In the summer of 2017 I needed help in fine-tuning the English of what was to be my dissertation. On a recommendation, I then came into contact with the Swedish American Jacob Truedson Demitz, who meritoriously assisted me with the linguistic issues. Our work on my dissertation was simplified by the fact that Demitz was well versed in Swedish history. It turned out that he had penned a book about Swedish royalty, Throne of a Thousand Years (Los Angeles and Ludvika 1996), which was based on solid literary studies.

Jacob Truedson Demitz eventually recognized the possibilities created by the collections of Swedish portraiture having been made available at Wikimedia Commons. By combining parts of the text of his earlier work with parts of the treasure of illustrations now available to the public, the work presented here has been created. He also saw a connection between the portraits of royalty and the “selfies” that now have become popular with our new telephone technology. Witty, in my opinion. I can see several good points made by the work presented here. Most important perhaps is that Swedish history is presented with brevity, but in an agreeable and easily accessible way. One of the additional good points is that a host of portraits is brought forth. The portraits are published in cropped formats, which gives one a better feel for the person behind the portrait. The thought of cropping portraits tighter has entered my mind as well, but has not born fruit in any of my books. Through his comprehension of both the English and the Swedish language, Jacob Truedson Demitz has also created a book that can be useful to those who wonder about name translation and similar matters. Furthermore, Demitz has put in fine work on presenting the History of Sweden. In that context he has noted, among other things, the burial sites of different monarchs, which is interesting indeed. Even quite a bit of ornamental information gives the wording spice. He also does a good deed by going back a thousand years in time. Far too much writing on Swedish history begins with King Gustav I (1520s), which leads to quite a loss of historical perspective. It is gratifying that Demitz gives early Swedish history some of the attention it deserves. In the context, I think he reasonably handles the uncertainties there are about the earliest Swedish history. An interesting list of bibliography contributes to the value of the book. All in all, I am delighted to write a few words about this book, which I believe can be useful as well as entertaining.

Autumn of 2019, Ulf Sundberg, PhD and author.

--SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:29, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the quote. Since you want to defend the merits of this book against allegations of WP:SELFPUB and are using it as a source despite your COI, I think we should have a discussion on reliable sources noticeboard. I will start the discussion later this week. Hopefully we will obtain a neutral assessment on whether the book can be considered a reliable source, or whether the references to it should be replaced by more reliable sources. Looking at the old discussions scattered around WP, that discussion seems long overdue. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 04:43, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I have no COI whatsoever re: Dr. Sundberg. Dr. Sundberg did not publish the book. You seem to be acting vindictively here because I haven't agreed with you about everything. I have not seen the book used as a reference except as might be supported by the preface by Dr. Sundberg. Preface text can and often is used as a reliable source, better so than the rest of many a book. OK, we know that you just don't like that book or anything in it, the hell with any doctor of history - you know better. If that's really what & how you want to discuss, by all means. The article on Throne of a Thousand Years was tested for deletion years ago, but that failed, pre-Sundberg even, because there were citable news articles.

I wrote to you here about a legitimate behavioral concern (bold type above) where you since have tried to correct the mess you made. That's good, and I should thank you for it. Perhaps you should stop being so angry now? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC)