Prefixcaz

Welcome!

Hello, Prefixcaz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• 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:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- P.MacUidhir 20:05, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Scandinavia

Hej. We would appreciate it if you would direct your attention to Talk:Scandinavia. Your edits have been reverted three times by myself and others, and we would prefer to discuss the reasons / cited sources for your edits rather than revert them without discourse.

-P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 20:05, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Hello again. :) I see you are having fun with editing Scandinavia. I am just going to wait until you pause for a while and then take a look at your additions again. Sound good?

Oh, and since you are new here, to respond to these messages just edit this page and add your comments below mine, using : marks in increasing amounts at the left to mark new comments. So, for example, to respond to this one I am writing now, use two : marks at the left. This is one of those things I had to learn on my own before encountering the Wikipedia:How_to_edit_a_page#Wiki_markup, so I thought to mention it in case you have not read that article.

Prefixcaz 03:18, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Pádraic, It feels comforting having you as a mentor. I did of course have a look at your fields of interest and I must say we share many of them. I'm looking forward to our discussions. And yes, I am indeed modifying the text to give more insight on the usage of the terms in the subject :) The article is cutting corners a little bit, in my opinion.

The languages. A Norwegian understands a Swedish speaker and a Dane just fine. A Swedish speaker might understand about 60% of Danish, but the problem is a very different pronounciation of Danish compared to Norwegian, Swedish and Finland-Swedish. Also the influence of Dutch and German in the Danish vocabulary causes problems. From a Danish point of view, they understand Norwegian very well, as the Norwegian vocabulary has been infuenced by Danish for hundreds of years, even if the pronounciation of Norwegian is closer to Swedish, but face problems understanding Swedish when the problem with a bigger difference in the vocabularity is combined with a very different pronounciation. Finland-Swedish is easier for a Dane to understand than Swedish is Sweden, as it has been influenced by Finnish in pronounciation, making it 'clearer' for a Dane to listen to. Not more similar, just simpler and clearer. In Finnish, all letters in a word are pronounced and this has had an effect on the Finland-Swedish.

In short,

Swe-Nor - easy both ways

Dan-Nor - easy both ways

FinSwe-Swe - easy both ways

FinSwe-Nor - easy both ways

Swe-Dan - difficult both ways, unless knowledge of

vocabularity+pronounciation

FinSwe-Dan - easier for Dan, but certain knowledge of vocabularity

is needed, difficult for FinSwe unless knowledge of vocabularity+

pronounciation

Prefixcaz 03:22, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Now, we solve these problems with a few simple tricks:

1) When I as FinSwe talk to a Swe, I avoid usage of terms that are only used in Finland, and use general common Swedish vocabulary. 2) When I speak with a Nor, I speak FinSwe but I use some Nor words. Same thing with a Dan, I mix Danish words into my FinSwe. 3) If there are words, that my conversational partner doesn't understand, we try to use synonyms or oldfashioned words, words that are not in common use in present day anymore. 4) If this doesn't solve the problem, we try to use words used in our own dialects, as dialects are normally older language and can provide very useful associations. 5) If the problem is still not solved, then we explain the meaning of the words in our respective mother tongues and try to find associations. 6) I'm in a lucky position, as I also speak Dutch and German. This means occasionally with the Danes, I can use them, so this would be the next step. 7) If the problem is STILL not solved, we use an English word :)

Actually it's like playing a word quiz all the time and with a little bit of routine it works just fine. But it is not honest to say, that there would be no trouble at all, or that the differences are merely a question of dialects.

As another curiosity, Icelandic is very old Norse spoken with similarities to Finnish 'clear/hard' way of pronouciation.

- -P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 17:50, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

My Studies and Wiki

I have gone back to school in my old days. The subject is Intercultural Communication and I'm studying it with a little bit of a special arrangement in Jyvaskyla Univ in Finland. As I live in Belgium, a lot of travelling is needed. Apparently I will also be attending some courses in Gent and/or Antwerp Univ's and furthermore I'm planning on joining some courses in certain SWE/DEN/NOR universities, haven't really decided where yet, but hopefully some additional studies in each country.

This means, due to a busy schedule, I will be updating my own user page and my comments/editions in Wiki in bursts. Sometimes there's more time for this, sometimes less. In case you wish to contact me, or are waiting for a reply regarding a subject, please be patient. Prefixcaz 01:33, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Please don't remove "citation needed" on Scandinavia

If you don't have the citations. This is a part of cleaning th article. Have fun editing --Comanche cph 22:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Copied and moved the discussion to Comanche cph. Prefixcaz 13:14, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Nordiccouncil.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Nordiccouncil.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. De728631 (talk) 20:43, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Domestic violence against men. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount and can lead to a block, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. Jytdog (talk) 01:27, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Wow, so when I reverted a text TWICE and referred to the TALK page, you discard the sources and give me a warning. That is censorship, bullying and misuse of admin rights.Luckily the edits are visible both on the article page as well as on the talk page. Prefixcaz (talk) 01:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

please read WP:BRD. It is great to be BOLD, but if you are reverted, discuss until things are figured out. Don't talk and edit war. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 01:58, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Please have a look which one of us went to the Talk page and which one started reverting without discussion. Hint: I went straight to the Talk page. How about a little bit less of the hypocrisy and more to sticking to the rules of Wikipedia?Prefixcaz (talk) 02:14, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

The edit warning is for your behavior. You were Bold, you were reverted and you added the content back, instead of waiting to allow consensus to develop. You appear to be very new to WP. It is strange since you have an edit history going back very far. I just looked farther. This account was inactive for a long time and just re-activated. OK, I am going to write you a longer note. Jytdog (talk) 02:17, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

You are still not checking the time of my edits in teh article and the Talk page. You should give yoursenf a warning, as you failed to come to the Talk-page before a double revert. Stop being a hypocrite and live up to the standards. I am not a user who started editing yesterday and I am not unfamiliar with the pillars. Don't misuse the trust put in you.Prefixcaz (talk) 02:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

I see you would like to add content to my page without providing argumentation. I have deleted the last and will delete any further comments from you, unless they are warnings or blockings, as IMO you are misusing your admin rights and not participating in a discussion. I would very much appreciate you stop the bullying, engage in a discussion based on argumentation and counterargumentation and live up to the trust that has been put on you as an admin.Prefixcaz (talk) 02:27, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

You are still not reading nor answering, thus I will be deleting all your comments on my page. Please stay respectful and do not attack other users. Talk about the content, not about a person.Prefixcaz (talk) 03:19, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User:Jytdog has been reverted or removed because it was placed on the editor's user page rather than the user's talk page. If you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page.Thank you. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 03:42, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

My apologies. I will place it on the user's talk page. Thank you for the advice.Prefixcaz (talk) 03:46, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Prefixcaz. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Prefixcaz. 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)