Talk:Swedish language/Archive 4

4630:

with immigrant variants and why is it relevant there? What does it have to do with Rinkeby Swedish being "surprisingly similar to variants in geographically distant immigrant-dominated suburbs", since the previous paragraph claims that Rinkeby Swedish is also for immigrant variants in Malmö and Göteborg. To me, the author is claiming Rinkeby Swedish to only in Stockholm and the so-called variants in geographically distant immigrant-dominated suburbs are the ones in Malmö and Göteborg. (The text contradicts itself and should be corrected with references that support the correct version.) What does the boy with two Swedish parents have to do with anything? Is that supposed to be somehow related to how long they have lived in Sweden? (It's possible to take as few as 3 years in Sweden to get Swedish citizenship, so being Swedish doesn't say anything about how long someone has lived in Sweden.) Was he speaking Rinkeby Swedish also? What was his native language? That section is supposed to be about immigrant variants of Swedish but it appears to be more

5012:"Finland Swedish": I'm sure you're aware that Finland was Swedish since the 13th century until it was conquered by Russia in the early 19th century. The first major settlements in Finland were by Swedish-speakers and the entire nobility spoke Swedish, which meant that the administrative language was Swedish. It gradually changed after Finland became more independent under Russian rule, but it wasn't really until the early 20th century that Finnish became properly represented as the majority language. It's certainly not the only example of a minority language dominating the cultural and political spheres. 4581:. It's currently not clear that all of the text came from the same reference and it needs to be shown somehow in the text, not here in the talk page. If the entire text came from a single source, that can be made clear by a sentence in the very beginning claiming this. The same applies to the rest of the sections in the article that are based on a single source. :* History: Dates should be substantiated with references since they're not common knowledge, they make the text verifiable, and they help give references for interested readers who would like to find out more about the topic. 3749:, and once you've done it it's easy to ignore date links, even while paying attention to others. I do it all the time. So I don't see date links as "harmful." As to point B, it's true that "policies and guidelines are subjects of change ," but in this case I'm not aware of any movement in that direction, and even if there were, it would not be relevant to any argument until a consensus was reached to actually change the policy or guideline in question. As to point A, your argument here is kind of silly too: it's easy to speculate about what the MediaWiki software 4706:("flagpole knob repairman" for those who don't speak Swedish), a common example that is more or less fictional. The point here is not flabbergast non-Swedish speakers by giving completely outlandish examples, but trying to illustrate at least moderately feasible long-ish compounds that differ from how English handles words like this. As far as I remember, I didn't come up with the two example I reverted to, but I do consider them to be very good. As for your complain that the English translation makes no sense, could you expand on that a bit? 3768:

do without it. Later, they bring it up on the policy pages: "hey, we've managed to write a perfectly fine article while not doing this or that, and we think it's not really a helpful guideline" and the policy is discussed and changed. And with all due respect, the number of users who actually set the date preference to something non-standard is minuscule compared to the total number of readers (who see no benefit from the linking), and probably also small compared to the number of readers that get confused by the unnecessary links.

4472:

article and that's actually not the case. As the primary author, Peter should be helping with this instead of complaining about it, since he knows the most about why he added certain text and where the info came from. If you have any interest in this topic besides being critical, then you would also help instead of only criticizing. If you have specific questions about any of the citation requests, feel free to ask and I will be glad to elaborate. If you question my motives, you're welcome to list the article in

4713:"Immigrant variants": "Rinkeby Swedish" is to the best of my knowledge the only reasonably common English term for variants of Swedish spoken by immigrants and their children. If not, maybe there can be a rewording to point out that Malmö and Gothenburg also have their particular forms of immigrant dialects. The relevant passage (including the small change that I made) says that Rinkeby Swedish may be spoken by the children of both immigrants and non-immigrants. I should also stress that 1067:(outdenting) The info about the colon is correct and relevant, so i don't see how a couple of lines is such a disaster that it had to prompt this long discussion. Here's why i think that it is relevant: If we were talking about quotation marks for example, then i'd say that it doesn't belong on the main language article, because almost every Latin-based orthography has a different style for them; but this usage of colon is almost exclusive to Swedish. (Correct me if i'm wrong.) -- 3864:

agreement on that point, there's nothing we can do about it. In addition, I have a hard time thinking of any situation where a date link would actually be relevant. To answer your last question, I cannot think of any situation where it would be undesirable to link full dates. It's entirely possible that "normally" in the guideline is simply a weasel word, although I don't know that; I think it's a mistake to attach too much significance to it. Also, you say:

3400:

doesn't include info that he wants only shows that he has no respect for other editors who criticize any aspect of this article. Peter could have simply gone and found some references, like most people would do. Instead, he chose to argue, complain, deride, discredit, exaggerate, etc. Anyway, you're welcome to try deescalating the conflict here by helping to resolve the issues I've brought up since it appears that he plans to ignore them. –

5650: 31: 2111:"En" and "ett words" are self-explanatory terms that are primarily used in secondary educational facilities and among foreign students. They're convenient for the purpose of learning a language, but have very little to do with linguistics and describe only the surface form of the indefinite articles of those two genders. It's like naming a verb conjugation after the associated suffixes rather than proper linguistic terms. 5015:"Vocabulary: Claiming that the statement is OR because it doesn't have a citation is like claiming that I need to cite a book on meteorology to claim that the sky is blue. Considering your second reply in this thread attempted to disprove the statement by citing examples that obviosuly confirmed it, it appears you have misunderstood this issue in much the same way that you misunderstood the gender terminology. 3816:, because that's my preference; it also happens to be standard in many English-speaking countries, even though it is not standard in the country that I live in and that also tends to dominate the English Knowledge (XXG). Another point is that user date prefs permit the consistent display of dates (to whatever format the user's date prefs are set; if the user doesn't make any changes, it will probably be the 4087:

year when the approximate current population reached that figure. In this case, the population has gone from 5.53% in 2004 to 5.49% 2006, and considering that the article doesn't even state the population at more than one decimal, either way the figure would be 5.5%. Furthermore, panda has assumed that population statistics for languages in Finland are based only on language profeciency, not

4222:(unindent) Perhaps I am dense, but I see no conflict in these numbers. All references agree that currently about 5.5% of Finns are Swedish speakers and the minor variations that exist could be explained by rounding alone. Using the latest available figure ("As of 2006") and noting that the percentage has declined over the years (The virtual-finland ref has a history) should be sufficient. 4677:"History": Every single date, especially not that are given as entire centuries, doesn't require separate citations. The division of Swedish into these historical periods can be referenced in even the most basic sources on Swedish. Check Pettersson, if anything. If you wish to argue on principle that there's no scholarly consensus, then you should at least try to give an example. 4512:"History": I see no motivation for any of the tags in this section and no indication of any attempt to check even any reference whatsoever. The implication that the last sentence is weasel wording I don't understand at all. It's merely a disclaimer that warns the reader not to take subdivisions too literally, as this languages simply never change over the course of just a year. 1146:), which is used to test Swedish language proficency for Finnish citizenship or government employment (different levels are required for different posts). It conforms with the common European language testing rules and should thus be of use also outside the country (in practice I don't know if Swedish authorities accept our certificates or Finnish authorities theirs). 3690:. Both would display the date according to the user's set preference, if any, otherwise as entered. Does anybody know if this is in an way feasible? (Or if tags don't work then maybe templates?) This way dates could be formatted according to everybody's pleasure, without having them linked to the date article - unless double square-brackets are also present. 3845:

edited with dashes, while "US dates" (when entered as numbers only) are edited with slashes. There shouldn't be a problem there either. And, also, you addressed only half of my C argument: what about the zillion of articles that link to the date articles? How do you identify those in which the date really has a relevant meaning - e.g. 9/11?

3562:(XXG) guideline has been shown to be in conflict with this particular aspect of the guidelines. The only supporter of the date linking here that made an honest attempt to reply to my question about how this application actually benefited the article rather frankly admitted that it really had no point other than to enforce the guidelines. 1760:"Common" and "neuter" are translated terms thta to my knowledge are accepted. I don't have a Swedish grammar in English, so I can't say either way. If you have better candidates, go ahead an change them. Either way, they are merely synonyms for the same concept. It doesn't change the status of grammatical genders in Swedish. And 3582:

to Swedish. Lurker claims that they do no harm, but that's somewhat beside the point since they don't actually don't do any good either. The rest of the arguments are really just different ways of saying "the guidelines say so". Simply counting the ways they have been reworded doesn't make the point more valid.

4541:"Immigrant variants": The section as a whole is based on Kotsinas and the footnote covers the information. The status of Rinkeby Swedish as a general term for all types of immigrant Swedish is hardly something that one ought to demand a separate citation for. Other terms exist, but it's not really relevant to 1221:

complete reference in the "Sources" section. Currently, the notes are plain text that do not hyper-link (a href) to its source/complete reference. I'm proposing to have the notes be automatically hyper-linked to a specific source so when someone clicks on a specific note, it shows which source it came from.

4130:, the info should be more precise than just a general statement. We don't know if 5.5% of the population will continue to be Swedish speakers in the future and the 5.5% has only been true since 2004. Also, as stated above, the stats do not claim the language listed is the first language so adding that is 3702:

can be reached, and C) it actually does harm: it clutters articles with links, so that relevant ones will be harder to discriminate from the less relevant ones, and it creates links from date articles to zillions of articles, which makes it harder to find those in which the date has a relevant meaning.

4201:

is considered the most reliable. I would personally go with the numbers from Statistics Finland, since they were updated the most recently, use the PDF to establish that the numbers are for Swedish speaking Finns, and possibly comment on the contradictory numbers from Virtual Finland in a footnote. –

5200:

to use the autoformatting function, because it is dysfunctional in several key ways. The arguments appear in the archives of this talk page and elsewhere. A move signed by 85 WPians to ask Bugzilla to FIX the biggest problem—the entanglement with the linking functionality—has thus far failed; this is

4200:

only gives number for 1900 and 2006, which are identical to the Statistics Finland stats. So now what? At least they establish the %s are for Swedish speakers in Finland, which can equate to those whose first language is Swedish. But the actual number is questionable and depends on which reference

4086:

panda has simply misunderstood how population figures are normally stated. Any article dealing with the current size of a certain population always gives the latest updated stats, usually with the term "as of X". The problem is that panda has interpreted this to mean that one should state the initial

3997:

that unlinks all date fragments (solitary years, solitary months etc). I think full dates should not be linked either but the script leaves full dates linked in accordance with guidance. It is easy to use. Feel free to use it directly or take pieces of code from it. Ask at my talk page if you want to

3715:

A drawback of internet communications is that small conflicts easily escalate into much larger ones. A lot of the small cues we use to understand the intent and meaning behind other peoples comment are in the form of body language, which written communications lack. I'm pretty sure that if we all sat

3162:

person trying to improve this article and everyone else is simply slavishly following rules. You seem to have no concept of the fact that someone apart from you can have a valid opinion on the formatting issue. You need to discuss the issue rather than simply dismissing anyone who disagrees with you.

3043:

The only reasons given are that a) the guidelines (supposedly) say so and b) that a piffling minority of readers can choose not to show the dates (including yourself). What has been quite cleverly avoided by both you and panda is to comment on the encyclopedic relevance of linking random dates, which

2593:

Population statistics aren't formulated as "time frames". They give the actual counts or estimates of populations at a given time. In 2006 it was 5.49% and that's what's matters. The population in 2005 and 2004 isn't relevant to the current population any more than the population in 1950. Stating "as

2478:

The 5.5% is only relevant from 2004-2006 so it shouldn't be written without a time frame. Also, the statistics do not say that it is spoken as a first language, just that it is spoken by x% of the population so the text is incorrect. I didn't put the correct range in the text anyway but your revert

1525:

This isn't a matter about whether or not "Citations are there to help anyone who is actually going to look the source up, not to satisfy gratuitous demands for page numbers" or that it's annoying that certain info in included. There are standardized methods for citing sources that should be followed

1514:

If kommunerna.net and Statistics Finland are the sources for the first paragraph of "Geographic distribution", then there should be a specific URL that is cited, not just a general link to the main page of those websites. If you can find the specific URL, then please add it. In the mean time, I can

1476:

Web references do not require cumbersome code masses to be uniform; all we need to do is correct the notes that aren't conforming. There's also the very annoying date linkage that serves absolutely no practical purpose. The date that one looked up a website is in no way relevant to the articles about

1210:

As for that Harvnb template, I just don't get it. It adds a few characters of code for the very uncomplicated sequence of author(s)-year-page/chapter. And it should be pointed out that the year is redundant information in a footnote unless you're using more than one source written by the same author.

863:

I understand your point, and it does actually mention one word contractions in the Knowledge (XXG) article. I was only commenting that when someone says a contraction in English, they normally mean putting together 2+ words. That doesn't mean that one word contractions don't exist. Anyway, this is

772:

are very slim and the interest in her seems to be very low as both the Swedish and English articles about her are very small. Also, unless you can come up with another example, the text is incorrect as it implies that there is more than one name that is abbreviated this way. I personally don't know

4811:

The text needs a reference to substantiate that Rinkeby Swedish is in fact used for immigrant variants of Swedish outside of Stockholm, especially since your own reference in the 2nd paragraph (Kotsinas) seems to contradict this. There is nothing wrong with simply calling it "immigrant variants" or

4673:

Improving articles is a collaborative process. I've honored many of your requests right off the bat and claiming that no progress is being made is not particularly fair of you. You should be prepared to accept at least a few rounds of discussion before threatening to go to FAR to be vindicated. I've

3654:

Would everybody calm down a bit? I've been encouraged by Panda to join the discussion. Before I start, I would just like to rebut one of the statements regarding the guidelines above; that they say that "all full dates should be wikilinked". They don't. They say "Full dates, and days and months, are

3161:

The phrase "helpless victims of our own guidelines" is meaningless unless you assume that the guidelines are wrong (in which case, why not try to get them changed). You have constantly refused to show the slightest respect for anyone else's opinion- instead you paint a picture where you are the only

2380:

This is pointless. The overwhelming majority of users don't know or won't ever bother to change those preferences. In practice, linking those dates is to force everyone to view them as links, and that despite the fact that they don't have anything to do with the article whatsoever. They have nothing

1661:

You may know that the Bolander book is from Svenska Akademien, but it's not obvious from the reference. So either page numbers should be listed, the book should be moved down to Recommended reading, or the in-line citation moved up. On the topic of grammar, who states that Swedish nouns are either

373:

That's why I specifically mentioned that the last one is probably the interesting one. Also, the first example is different from English since a comma would normally be used, but that's such a minor difference that it may not be worth mentioning. Probably not all of the examples should be included

5322:

You are doign the same. Saying that everyone but you is revert warring is self-righteous. We are both revert warring- I think I have a reason to rv since following policy should be the default action unless a consensus to ignore the rule can be built. And other editors are restoring the dates while

5126:

The dialect section has a rather long explanation on Swedish dialects where many aspects are discussed. Swedish is indeed a fairly uniform language compared to the examples you've given, but I'm not sure exactly how to reword it so that it would address your complaints. Do you have any suggestions?

5100:

The article claims that Swedish, Norwegian and Danish are mutually intelligible, but also that there are dialects of Swedish that are not intelligible to most Swedish speakers. I believe that the dialects are overemphasized in this article. To me, the regional variation in Sweden seems less than in

4567:

The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. The source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find

4449:

Well, the short story is that because I am skeptical that the recent edits actually improves the article I think it is helpful to discuss them - especially since you've made some questionable decisions before regarding this article and has driven the main author to a wikibreak. With that said, I'll

4439:

I've been tagging by section, in case you didn't notice. Since this article is currently considered an FA, it is kind of urgent. Either that, or it should be removed from FA status in the mean time. If you're interested in being helpful instead of only critical, I've intentionally left some easy

4403:

What I'd like to see is a reference substantiating that it is "officially recommended" for local and state government. I'm not questioning that it is the main language. FYI, tagging the article is a major headache, especially considering how much is unsourced. It would be more helpful if someone

4280:

is a method for dealing with statements that date quickly. We really don't know what the stats will be for 2007 or later, and with the current trend, it is likely to decrease. In this case, the statistic 5.5% was true in 2004, 2005, and 2006. So stating "as of 2006", although accurate, would not

3890:

You see, you too are confusing the functions linking and date-formatting. I have nothing against consistency in date-formats. What method would I use? Well, I suggested a change in the software (which can be read above), separating the functions. Henrik said on my talkpage that he too thinks it's a

3767:

I find links which lead to nowhere relevant mildly annoying, and I know of several users who have said they found the date links confusing. A change in consensus often start like this. A group of editors decide that a certain guideline doesn't really help them improve the article, so they decide to

3757:

do, if only it worked the way we want it to, but right now it works the way it works and we have to live with those limitations. I agree with your analysis and I don't particularly think wikilinking is a good way to handle date formatting (although handling it in another way would require some kind

3581:

The arguments so far is that the dates have absolutely nothing to do with the article topic and their only relevance is to an aspect of the process of referencing the article, e.i. a form of self-reference. That means they don't lead anyone to any higher understand of anything even remotely related

3399:

Henrik, if Peter would like to be treated with respect, then he needs to treat other editors with respect. Simply stating that he's written 75% of the article and then attacking other editors who ask for references, making snide remarks at editors with differing opinions, and blasting a book which

3085:

No-one is avoiding anything. 3 reasons have been given for keeping this formatting- it helps users who choose to set date preferences, it is an agreed-upon policy, it does no harm. If you think these aren't relevant that is nothing more than your opinion. I see no point in continuing this debate if

2994:

And as for arguing from your own point of view, which I have already pointed out is a piffling minority of potential readers, what are you trying to do? Prove me right? The MoS isn't set in stone and we don't have to go change the guidelines everytime someone argues for an exception. If you want to

2901:

Articles are not written for the tiny minority of readers that happen to be registered users and especially not for the absolutely insignificant number of those registered users that actually bother changing the preferences for whether (again, completely irrelevant) dates are linked. This is a very

2511:

As stated previously, 5.5% is only relevant for a limited time range and it should be stated in the text, not in a footnote. And why have you chosen to only state in the footnote 2006 when it has been relevant from 2004? Also, all of the statistics and quotes need citations. I've already pointed

1830:

You're obviously taking a lot of the comments I've made personally so I'll ask someone else to also comment on this issue. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with how referencing is normally done in English, using the style guides mentioned above, as your comments lead me to believe you don't

1220:

Maybe you misunderstood me. This article currently has a "Notes" and a "Sources" (previously called "References") section. I'm going to refer to the items in the list in the "Notes" section as "notes" and those in the "Sources" section as "sources". All of the notes in the "Notes" section have a

786:

The colon is used for contraction. What else would "s:t" and "Ax:son" be? I can't think of any examples of names other than Ax:son Johnson right now, and they're not overly common, but I know I've seen it before. And the comparison in this case should be with English since we're writing the article

5434:

support. The normal way of trying to convince others of a certain formatting option is to try to convince them, not to accuse them of being biased (or worse) as soon as they voice their opposition. If you encounter stiff opposition when it comes to subjective layout issues, it's usually prudent to

4912:

Finland Swedish: You would like to continue to claim Swedish was the dominant language in Finland when I've already given you a statistic that shows that it isn't? (See previous comment) In fact, look at the Virtual Finland ref and you'll see a second reference that shows that it can't be true.

4818:

It's not my job to read Kotsinas since I didn't add the text. Since you've read it and apparently added the text, its your job to clarify the text until it makes sense to someone who reads it for the first time. It doesn't matter what you write about it in the talk page. Try editing the text or

4780:

translated as "production controller system software update" is not the best way to translate the text since it has to do with process control or product management, not "production controller", which doesn't make sense in this context. So it is better to replace it with something that makes more

3701:

dates, A) it helps users who choose to set date preference, B) it is an agreed-upon policy, and C) it does no harm, I would say that A) is a valid argument, but the function could possibly be achieved in the way described above, B) policies and guidelines are subjects of change, if a new consensus

3439:

Are you defending Peter or not? Since your comments seem to be primarily directed at everyone but Peter. The only editor who has been disrespectful here that I can see has been Peter, so who are you directing your comment at? Besides his comments here, have you also seen his personal attacks on

2468:

As for consistency, the dates are actually quite consistent throughout the article, even if they might not be of the exact standard you prefer. I didn't notice that you had made a footnote out of the US Census reference, because you also kept insisting on campaigning on not repeating sources under

1507:

A general reference should be listed in the recommended reading section if it is not meant to be cited in the article. Otherwise page numbers should be listed -- this is standard practice when citing references. For the Bolander book, it's not clear why that book is cited at all. Is it just for

4629:

Immigrant variants: I would agree that Rinkeby Swedish has to do with Rinkeby and Stockholm. If you now claim that it is also associated with Malmö and Göteborg, then a reference is needed. The text also needs to clarify why the survey is even mentioned in that section. What does it have to do

4471:

And what questionable edits are you referring to? Please do tell. Also, I don't know why you're accusing me of having "driven the main author to a wikibreak" when he was edit warring with other editors as well. Anyway, you and Peter seem to think the burden is on me to find the sources for the

4413:

The problem with overly tagging and putting notices on articles is that it reduces the usability for the readers, which should always be the main focus for us. As for tagging being a headache, why not take it slowly and do one section at a time, giving other editors enough time to respond to that

4254:

Statistics that vary over the years are almost always reported that way. It is a way to alert the reader that the figure is dynamic. You are correct about the Norway example, but that is a discrete event which happened once. Had the status of Norway changed from month to month, "As of" would have

3863:

I did miss the part of your argument that said that linking all dates makes it hard (or really, impossible) to distinguish relevant links to dates. However, that really amounts to repeating the argument that the MediaWiki software should not use wikilinking for date formatting, and while we're in

3625:

No, the guidlelines are not intended for only linking in-prose dates. The guideline is intended to allow users to decide how dates are displayed. Allowing them to have some dates displayed according to their preferences and not others would be crazy. Why should users be allowed to decide how some

3561:

Pushing an interpretation of a guideline with no support other than citations of said guidelines has little to do with respecting consensus. Valid arguments have been provided for why the date linking in this case doesn't add anything to the article, and one of the defining aspects of a Knowledge

3375:

Perhaps I expressed myself unclearly. Nowhere did I say the warning was a problem, but slapping a template on a regular user is unlikely to be helpful. A polite note will probably be more productive. It is the responsibility of all editors to work towards deescalating conflicts and avoid behavior

3329:

and keep reverting was in poor taste. While no one owns the article, respecting the opinions of the main author of an article is basic courtesy, especially over such a minor detail with no real impact on either accuracy or reader experience. Even though the guidelines say so, it is really just an

2842:

allows editors a certain amount of latitude when it comes to the rules, it is not an excuse for acting against consensus. Make a case as to why this article should be formatted differently to all the others on Knowledge (XXG), or change the date formatting policy. Don't just remove the formatting

2428:

Did you even read the text or look at the history before you reverted? The reference states specifically that only in certain years did 5.5% of the Finnish population speak Swedish, something that you've left out. I'll remind you that having consistent formatting of references is also a part of

2211:

I'll remind you that Knowledge (XXG) is based on verifiability, not truth. If you can find a reference that calls the two Swedish genders as "common" and "neuter" in English, then add it. Bartleby and dictionary.com don't apply since they only give general descriptions of those words and do not

838:

are not considered contractions in the traditional/common sense of the word. Since I know you plan to change the text if I add it, it would be easier to work this out in the talk page instead of in the article. But if you prefer, I'll modify it based on your comments and add it to the article.

812:

I think you should try tweaking the text to fix what you feel is confusing. It's easier to discuss and reach a compromise that way. One recommendation I can give you, though, is that you try to condense the parenthetical info and avoid mathematical signs. Also, keep in mind that catering to those

4717:

the boys in this case had Swedish as their native language, though those with immigrant parents were most likely multilingual. That the parents were Swedish in this context means that they were not immigrants. If you want clarification in this issue, I really recommend reading Kotsinas yourself.

3961:

be done, then there should be a good reason to deviate from that guideline -- i.e., a good reason why a given article, or portion of an article, is not "normal" and should be treated differently. I've seen nothing yet to convince me that this article should not follow this guideline. So I agree:

3844:

Well, Tkynerd, you may find my C argument silly, but I, on the other hand, find the urgent need of date-formatting a bit exaggerated. I, for one, have no problem understanding November 27, though I mostly write that date as 27 November. I guess that goes for all of us. As for ISO dates, they are

3684:

What if we could separate these functions? There must be a way to do that. Look at the ISBN function. It's automatically creating a link to a special page, without one having to use double square-brackets. In the case of dates, the problem is probably that it's hard for the software to correctly

2482:

instead of just reverting, which is what I've been working on the entire time. Regarding inconsistent dates, you have used both day-month-year and month-day-year, which is not consistent. Also, I don't know where you've gotten the idea that I've been "campaigning on not repeating sources under

1756:

Citations are more logically placed after the statements it's supposed to cover, as is done throughout this article. If anything, placing it after the first sentence will only result in another other zealous rule-enforces to demand that it be placed after the next sentence. And the next, and the

1284:

I've started to make changes to the Sources section. The place of publication, publisher, and edition number were missing for most citations, so they have been added. The ISBN was incorrect for at least one book, and has been fixed. I removed the following sources as they are not cited in the

5562:

Recent discussion has brought a really embarrassing problem to my attention. With the present date formatting (ISO-style), the very argument brought up by many of those who support auto formatting are in fact rendered pointless. Try logging out and looking at the footnote to see what I mean. If

5524:

since I'm a software developer by trade and I'm getting sick of the endless debate :) In the mean time, I'm in favor of letting the MoS and links be, and put our energies into other stuff. My opinion is that having the dates linked for a little while longer won't really hurt the articles and if

4371:

I can help find references later. It makes more sense to tag the article first so that multiple editors can help find references for the article. You don't need to be an expert in the area to search for references about a specific sentence. You just need to find a reference that supports the

2342:

Dot, no matter the wording of guidelines, can you please explain how it is relevant to this article to link the dates a Wikipedian accessed a certain web reference? Does it in any way, shape or form advance a reader's understanding of Swedish? It seems like this is a very fitting opportunity to

5260:

Please don't go and reinsert the date links while there is a discussion going on. It is clear that there is significant opposition to them, not just from me and Peter, and reinserting them while a significant number of people think they make the article worse and the discussion is ongoing wont

4942:

Barfotabarn: It's a quote and those need complete references, which includes page numbers. If "the reference is extremely obvious", then go find the book and return with the page numbers. If you've never actually looked in the book before, then it shouldn't be cited here as the source of the

2574:

The 5.5% figure is limited to a specific time frame, 2004 to 2006, and it should be stated in the text. The statistics state that in 2004, 5.53% spoke Swedish and in 2005, 5.50% spoke Swedish. So why are you stating that 5.5% is only from 2006?? Assuming it still applies to 2007 without any

1653:

If you look at the article, there are several paragraphs that are completely without references. If you'd like an example, look at the Classification section. Who states that "Swedish is an Indo-European language" and that "it belongs to the East Scandinavian languages"? And who claims that

3131:

It doesn't but it's a convention. I quite agree that date wikilinking is confusing, and in fact when I first came to Knowledge (XXG) I found it quite annoying as it took me a while to figure out the date links had nothing to do with the article in question - but a guideline is a guideline, it

1521:

The Nationalencyklopedin entry also needs to be fixed (it needs more specific info about which version of NE the info is from) but since I don't have a solution for that right now, I haven't done anything about it yet. I can always use the info from my version of NE since the numbers are the

1265:

Okay, that function made a lot more sense. I don't want to oppose a minor technical improvement, but since I'm overall rather skeptical to templates, I think it might be a bit unnecessary in an article that doesn't have all that many sources. In articles with gargantuant reference lists, like

2564:

Again, specify your claims a bit more thoroughly. I don't want to second-guess what "several sections" actually means. I would also like to have your assurance that you've read through the article in its entirety. It feels like many of your complaints could be avoided if you just had a go at

3598:

For the billionth time (not by me, of course): Dates are wikilinked so that the MediaWiki software will render them according to user preferences. I have my own preferences set so that dates are displayed day-month; e.g., the above reference to the "November 27" article appears to me as "27

5385:

Lurker, please stop. Peter has the full support of at least 4 other editors here so calling his actions unilateral makes no sense (but we've refrained from edit warring over it, instead discussing on the talk page). You're also imposing a strictness the MOS in no way supports, it is just a

4244:

Stating "As of 2006" for something that has been true as of 2004 is simply incorrect and a misrepresentation of the data. It's like stating "As of 2006, Norway is independent of Sweden." Or for that matter, replace 2006 with 1906, 1907, 1908 or any year after 1905 when it actually became

3685:

identify a date, as it can be entered in many ways, and, in some cases, something that isn't a date could mistakenly be identified as an ISO date. So why don't we help the software along a bit? Let's be creative. Could there be "wiki-tags" - those that start with a < and end with a : -->

1238:

article -- that's not what I was talking about. Click on one of the items in the References section (equivalent to this article's "Notes" section) and see how it highlights a specific item in the "Works cited" section (equivalent to this article's "Sources" section). If the references in

1775:

No, including something in prose is sufficient, because you have to deliberately ignore the connection to miss it. You obvious failed to do an even cursery glance at the text in that case and removed the reference merely because there wasn't a footnote next to it. To me that smacks of

3891:

software deficiency. If it could be done, we could have consistency in date-formatting and still link only those dates that we consider relevant to link. How does one promote ideas to wikipedia, do you know? It must be possible to accomplish that. After all, man went to moon in 1969.

2021:

The book you're refering to is described as "A Practical Guide to the Mastery of Swedish". In that context "en" and "ett words" is very convenient for foreign language learners, but is not very descriptive. Common/neuter is a term that is better suited for encyclopedic purposes. See

4591:

Official status: I dispute that it is "officially recommended". It might be unofficially recommended or unofficially understood that everything be in Swedish but I've never heard that it is "officially recommended". Until there is a reference backing that claim, it is a disputed

5120:

the statement on mutual intellibility somewhat. I agree that spoken Danish can be quite difficult for Swedes to understand, but it's certainly not as different as languages like German or English. And it should be pointed out here that written Danish is certainly a lot easier to

4339:

Rather than listing here what needs references since it may then be difficult to find the exact location in the article, I'm just going to start tagging the article with {{fact}} tags so that its more obvious what exactly needs referencing. Please help find suitable references!

3275:

As far as I'm concerned, the guideline fanaticism isn't improving the article one bit. Otherwise I wouldn't spend time on it. But I would be very glad to see if panda could get around to formulating some of those reference claims he made so I could actually work on the problem.

1375:

David Crystal's book is a mini-encyclopedia that is arranged alphabetically. That's enough information for anyone who needs to look up the info. The citation of Bolander is a general one since the section itself is very general. It's not an in-depth analysis of Swedish grammar.

3721:

However, modifying the MediaWiki software to fix the bug that dates must be linked in order for auto-formatting to work is probably not practical to resolve the dispute - I don't expect that is something that could be fixed for months, even on a fairly optimistic time schedule.

3571:

There have also been 3 arguments (listed above by Lurker) for keeping the dates linked and only one argument for removing it that I can see. So what were the "valid arguments" that you are referring to? Nor have you answered yet how removing the links benefit Knowledge (XXG).

2212:

state that they apply to Swedish grammar or even which one is considered the common and neuter forms. Really, I don't know why you're so adamantly against finding a reference for it and want to keep slamming a book just because it doesn't use the words "common" and "neuter". –

5349:

You know what's self-righteous? Going around articles you otherwise have no interest in improving forcing irrelevant layout standards on them. It's the kind of behavior that makes other editors think twice about whether it's worth writing articles for Knowledge (XXG) at all.

4134:

unless another reference can be found that supports it. Currently, there is no other reference in the text than the Statistics Finland stats. Regarding what needs referencing, besides the previous issue with Swedish being a first language for 5.5% of the population, that's

2980:

Overlinking is not a neutral act as it merely serves as a distraction. Does the date linking help anyone understand the essence of the Swedish language? No. Is it a distraction to those who might (increasingly vainly) think that links at Knowledge (XXG) should be helpful?

2356:

It's been repeatedly stated that full dates should be wikilinked, to enable users' date preferences. The important thing is to make Knowledge (XXG) useful, how we personally wish to see dates displayed isn't important- we should give users a choice. Wikilinking does that.

4108:

Other than that, I've told several times that he's perfectly welcome to specify exactly what he feels needs fixing. If I have missed previous specifications in the heat of the argument, I urge panda to repeat them in this thread so they can be discussed and dealt with.

2713:

to claim that it is the first language of 5.5% of the population when it is not stated in the statistics. If you can find some other statistics that make that claim, then use that reference instead but until then, the text should be changed. Also, you're far over the

4404:

took the referencing seriously. Also, it's not clear to me how large or small the relevant text is from Crytal's book so yes, it needs page numbers, even if it's only one page. If you know what it is, then please add it/them instead of removing citation requests. –

1597:

Bolander's book is cited as a whole because it's general, relatively common and conveniently brief. If the article has one section on grammar and one Swedish grammar has been cited, there's really not much to complain about in terms of clarity. We're talking about

4748:

Finland Swedish: Completely lacking any citations and could use at least one. Why did you remove the cited text with stats about the percent of Swedish speakers in Finland today/2006? How do you know Swedish was the dominant language is Finland until 1917? The

1464:

Citations are there to help anyone who is actually going to look the source up, not to satisfy gratuitous demands for page numbers. When it comes to Crystal, the specific entry is more precise than a page reference. It's really no different from the reference to

1193:

article. I thought it would be a good idea since I'm probably not the only person who may not notice that there is both a Notes and References section in the article. If there's no objections, I can work on the changes, beginning with the References section.

4381:

I think you're in danger of going overboard with the tagging, fun as it may be. Do you really doubt the truthfulness of, for example, 'Swedish in Sweden is considered the "main language" and its use is officially recommended for local and state government'?

1552:

Barfotabarn should also be listed in Sources. I'll add it if someone else doesn't do it first. The poem actually needs page numbers since it is a direct quote from a book. If it in fact came from a website, then the website should be cited instead. (See

4095:

and by the simple logical conclusion that his assumption would also mean that whoever is proficient in one language is automatically excluded from being proficient in another, i.e. that every single resident of Finland speaks only one language and nothing

4855:"Finland Swedish": That Swedish was a dominant language in Finland in the 19th century is extremely basic knowledge. It's not the kind of thing that requires a citation. The reason that I removed the statistics is quite simply because it was a repetition. 5282:

The constructive thing to do if there is a dispute is to follow the MOS until a reason for not doing so can be provided. The MOS reflects consensus, if anyone wants not to follow it (or to change it), the burden is on them to build a consensus to do so.

1771:

The online version of NE is sufficient. Demanding links to a commercial electronic encyclopedia when it's easily searchable (and not available unless you pay for it) is just as pointless as the suggestion that I'd have to provide give page numbers for a

574:

Parenthases with this many examples are always frowned upon in FA articles. You don't need to explain every single instance of use of the colon in the language main article and full fledged tables would be giving this rather obscure fact undue weight.

4570:" It's not my job to find references for text I never added. Citation requests should not be removed until a citation is found by someone. The editor who added the text most likely knows the source and should add the missing citations to conform to 3669:

This guideline is partly contradicted by another guideline: "Link to one of this pages only if it is likely to deepen the reader's understanding of a topic". This indicates to me that if links are not relevant, then (maybe) "normally" doesn't apply.

3609:

Again, we're talking about dates that indicate that Anonymous Wikipedian X looked at a webpage. It has absolutely nothing with what the intent of the guidelines, which is to link in-prose dates. You're focusing on the letter, not the spirit, of the

4834:

Barfotabarn still needs page numbers since it is a quote from a book. The text should also be quoted. The year in the Sources section and the text also don't match. If you copied it from a web site, why not just add the website as the reference

2512:

out the Barfotabarn issue. There are also a ton of other statistics in the text that need citations. Also mentioned before, several sections of the article are without any citations and could use some. I've already given some examples earlier. –

1032:

Amir, I agree that some information on punctuation might be relevant, but we also need to keep a perspective here. In the scheme of things, exactly how important are issues like typography and machine text processing to a main language article?

5411:

Henrik: Your comment clearly shows your bias. Why are you only asking Lurker to stop reverting when Peter is also reverting? You've also failed to mention the number of editors who have stated in this talk page that they support date linking.

4621:

The long text example specifically states "very long" and "produktionsstyrningssystemsprogramvaruuppdatering" is not very long in comparison to "nagellacksborttagningsmedel". Nor does it make any sense at all in English the way it is currently

1974:

Obviously I'm referring to a book about Swedish grammar in English (written by Åke Viberg et al, translated to English by Michael Knight). To be more specific, the exact terms used in the book are "en" and "ett" words. You can see this in the

3186:

We're all the beneficiaries of our own guidelines, too. I still can't tell what benefit there would be from removing the wikilinks. Are you now going to spend some time improving this article then, or is that rhetoric only for other users? --

1086:

There certainly must be a diploma or certificate which foreigners can try to get for Swedish (similar the the French DELF and the Italian CILS). If there is information on that subject, it definitely should go in the article, or at least into

734:(such as "won't"), and the colon is not used for contractions in Swedish. I would personally just not compare it with English unless you want to compare and contrast all of the different ways in which the colon is used in English and Swedish. 4646:

of the page and that you don't want to find the refs, especially since you chose to remove them without asking first why the text was tagged. I would encourage you to put the tags back that you didn't find references for to show that you're

3828:

even though that's not how it was entered. Delinking dates puts the burden on the editors of a given article to use a consistent date format (and to agree on one, in the face of competing standard formats! How well is that likely to work?).

4734:

Since there are a lot of changes being made, when you state that you've removed something, please add a diff so it's clear what you're talking about. Reverting is always hostile unless there is a good reason for it, which you have yet to

3495:

by making every point into a battleground is not in the best interest of the article, and defending that kind of behavior simply because you've worked together with Peter on other articles only encouraging editors to disregard consensus.

2381:

to do with Swedish, linguistics or even any of the facts stated in the article. Hell, they don't actually have anything to do with the web references. They only indicate that a certain Wikipedian checked a website on that day. That's it.

974:

Tkynerd, Knowledge (XXG) does not cater to language learners. That's the business of Wiktionaries and dedicated WikiBooks. Encyclopedias are not written to be instruction manuals. It's absolutely no different from, say, the article about

4613:

being true than of it being true, such as "stola" from "en stol", "skoa" from "en sko", "sänga" from "en säng", "hunda" from "en hund", etc. Just because you've found a few examples that fit the case doesn't make it true. That's pure

4738:

Stating "You should be prepared to accept at least a few rounds of discussion before threatening to go to FAR to be vindicated" seems to at least indicate that you agree the article needs more references. So please start adding them.

2501:

Thank you for pointing out the deficiencies. The date inconsistency has been fixed and the year the statistics were collected have been specified in the footnote. Are there any other specific problems you would like to see addressed?

2182:("common", quite literally "that which is not neuter"). If you have a better grammar Swedish grammar in English to humor us with, very good, but don't wave around some high school-level beginner's guide as though it was authoritive. 1682:

Simply including something in the prose isn't sufficient. It should still contain an in-line reference of some sort. I've added that and fixed the reference since the text wasn't correct. (The date is from the 2000 US Census, not

3228:

And of course my point wasn't that you hadn't improved it in the past, only that you were also spending time in efforts other than improving it, and in particular spending such time chastising other users for spending such time. --

3716:

in the same room, it wouldn't take more than a few minutes to decide whether dates should be linked and no one would be particularly upset. Sometimes the best you can do is to try to take a step back and laugh at the silliness :)

1403:

The DI article is already cited in full in the Notes so it isn't necessary to include in the Sources section, for the same reason why several other complete citations in the Notes section don't need to be included in the Sources

4862:-endings is entirely spurious and has nothing whatsoever to do with original research. The fact that you cited three examples that conformed to the statement as something that was supposed to contradict it is quite illustrative. 3615:

I should also point out that it's somewhat narrow-minded to assume that everyone should have to fiddling with their preferences so that a few thousand wikiaficionados can have every single full date in Knowledge (XXG) linked.

3453:

Perhaps there is some element of that, since I've collaborated with Peter before and respect him as a good article writer. But had I thought that only Peter was at fault here, I would have said so. I don't think there is much

2830:

Full dates, and days and months, are normally autoformatted, by inserting double square-brackets, as for linking. This instructs the MediaWiki software to format the item according to the date preferences chosen by registered

377:"In Swedish orthography, a colon can appear inside words in a manner similar to the English apostrophe, between a word (or abbreviation, especially an acronym) and certain grammatical suffixes, mostly the genitive ending -s." 4195:

reference claims that in 2003 5.5% of the population are Swedish speakers while in 2004 5.6% were Swedish speakers. At the same time, Statistics Finland contradicts that (2003 = 5.55% ~ 5.6%, 2004 = 5.53% ~ 5.5%). And the

5305:

The MoS leaves room for interpretation and has been interpreted differently by many editors here. What you're doing by revert warring in this article and denying those interpretations is telling people they have to include

2837:

this rule, then they should make a case on this talk page as to why this article should be exempt from that policy. Unless you can do so, and build a consensus to ignore this rule, please do not remove the date formatting.

1508:

the statement about how adjectives precede the noun they modify? If so, then it needs a page number. If it is for additional text in that paragraph, then it should have been cited earlier, not at the end of the paragraph.

3758:

of special markup for dates, which adds to the body of what editors need to be familiar with -- also not ideal), but for immediate purposes there's nothing we can do about that. So for now, full dates should be linked. --

3352:

Warning people they have broken a guideline is not in poor taste- it stops them being blocked. And to not restore the content they delete is rewarding edit warring and encouraging edits that show disregard for consenus.

1204:

Notes are notes. The idea that you have to have a separate system of lettered notes for general comments is as far as I know something that is rather exclusive to Knowledge (XXG). I don't believe it's benefitial to our

364:, an article which is only marginally longer than the section on the same topic here. The bulk of these examples would also be especially tedious as they don't really differ much from how the colon is used in English. 2915:

Guidelines are just that, consensus is rather more important here. An occasional exception is not the same as blatantly disregarding consensus because you personally don't like it. That shows contempt for your fellow

2526:

The relevant figure is the last one taken, and that was in 2006. It means that the percentage of Finland Swedes in Finland in 2006 was (estimated to?) 5.49%. We're dealing with synchronious facts here, not historical

5064:

The text states "A very productive method for creating new verbs is the adding of -a to an existing noun." If it's so productive, then why doesn't it work for my examples? A contested statement needs a reference.

5237:

Then please have a debate in the appropriate place. This is the talk page for the Swedish language article. It is not the place to discuss changes to the manual of style. Do not use article talk pages as a soapbox.

4588:. The text "the system of subdivisions used in this article is the most commonly used by Swedish linguists" needs attribution. How can the text claim it is the most commonly used with no reference to support this? 563:

I don't know if you had any specific examples from the last group that you thought were especially important to mention. The above text may also be clearer in tables, which I can create if you think it would help.

959:

The information could well be useful to someone who is learning Swedish, just as similar information about English punctuation would be useful in the article on the English language on the Swedish Knowledge (XXG).

4324:

as that has an ambiguous meaning. It should be sufficient to state "Swedish speakers", since the Virtual Finland article even just calls them "Finland's Swedish-speaking population" or "Swedish-speaking Finns".

2579:. Anyway, I've specified my claims, you're the one who keeps ignoring them, much like the conversation below. Have you found the page numbers for Barfotabarn yet or not? Otherwise I'm changing the reference. – 4414:

section before moving on to the next? That would reduce your workload, reduce aggravation and still allow the readers to have a clean article. We're not on a deadline here. In the mean time, I'll refer you to

1654:"Continental Scandinavian languages could very well be considered to be dialects of a common Scandinavian language"? Where did any of this info come from? Right now, the majority of the article doesn't pass 2957:

P.S- If there is clear consensus to inlcude something then you should discuss the issue and change the consensus first. Simply posting on a talk page after making your edit does not entitle you to edit war.

4618:

unless there is a reference for it. Also "bila" doesn't mean to drive recreationally, it is much closer to "to drive around", "to drive", or "to travel by car" (the last defn being the one given by Lexin).

3868:

I, for one, have no problem ignoring date links while paying attention to others. I guess that goes for all of us. Finally, you had nothing to say about the other benefit provided by date linking, which is

1472:

Again, general sections require only general references. We're not talking about detailed coverage of grammar here. Unless, of course, you'd like to specify facts that you consider to be controversial or

1426:

The web references don't need all of the excess code if someone wants to rewrite it with all of the info that is now included. Previously they were missing a lot of details and not formatted uniformly.

4742:

Classification: Still needs something to make it clear that the entire text (2 paragraphs) is based on a single reference. The same applies to the entire History section, Standard Swedish, and Sounds.

2402:

Regarding the last set of reverts: Besides the date linking issue, you've now removed the reference that I added from Statistics Finland that supports that 5.5% of the Finnish population speak Swedish

4509:"Classification": The entire section is supported by Crystal. The statement "more recent" is relative, general information that doesn't make any claims about exactly when this new approach was taken. 720:

a colon can appear inside words in a manner similar to the English apostrophe, between a word (or abbreviation, especially an acronym) and certain grammatical suffixes, mostly the genitive ending -s.

2277: 4350:

By all means, though it would of course be even more helpful to insert references directly. I don't know enough about the subject to comment on your tagging, so I'll leave that to other editors.

3132:

represents community consensus, and just because you personally don't happen to like it is no reason to engage in revert wars when your preferred (minority) option is resisted by other editors.

1511:

The 2004 US Census data should have included an inline citation in "Geographic distribution". I can add that if someone else doesn't do it first. Strange that this wasn't done a long time ago.

4169:. I'm tired of trying to explain things that you're unwilling to accept simply because you're ignorant of them or because you can't be bothered with doing anything resembling decent research. 3021:

Nonsense. Multiple people have given reasons why date formatting is a good idea, and you have refused to engage with them, but have simply dismissed anything you disagree with a irrelevant.

5310:

to counter your personal opinion in order to be allowed to choose their prefered article layout. I don't see what your actions have to do with either respecting consensus or building it.

5101:

England or in the Netherlands, and I find the uniformity over such large distances quite striking. As to Danish, most Swedes have tremendous problems making sense of the spoken language. /

4602:

I see you just reverted the entire text and managed to remove the wiki-link I added. Maybe you should try editing the text instead of reverting in the future? Your reverts only create a

1789:, I do encourage you to bring up some deficiencies that should be amended, but I would like to ask you to not simply start bring up the movement and additions of random footnotes to where 5033:

Vocabulary: Sorry, I don't follow your comments. My examples obviously confirm that it isn't true as none of those words exist in Swedish. "it appears you have misunderstood this issue"

3693:

As you might have guessed, I'm inclined to agree with Peter Isotalo and Henrik, links (in their original meaning) should be relevant to the article to be meaningful. As for the arguments

2174:

There's two, actually. Bartleby and dictionary.com, but that was just to bring the proper terminology to your attention. All of this is really beside the fact that Bolander uses the term

1757:

next, and then we'll have the same footnote after every single sentence as is popular in many other articles. Placing citations at the end of paragraphs is often done in academic sources.

1679:

It is insufficient to only state "online version" of NE. You also need to include the actual link to each article and the date each article was accessed, like for any other web citation.

1423:

The Bolander citation still needs more information about the specific section in the book that is being cited and the page numbers, regardless of whether or not it is a general reference.

4989:

Finland Swedish: Prove it with a reference. Also, how can something have a dominant status but not be anywhere even close to being dominant in numbers? That text is misleading at best.

1611:

The date in webcites isn't the issue, but rather the annoying business of wikilinking it. The webcite templates force that linkage and is one of many reasons why I find them pointless.

4642:

Removing citation requests and reverting text made in good faith without any reasonable rationale other than indicating "I prefer my text" only makes me believe that you're claiming

4505:

Other than those tags that have been dealt with by clarification or extra referencing, there are some the merit of which I'd like to address. Here are the replies sorted by section:

3491:

criteria to maintain the article's FA status is being stubborn, then you should consider that it is at least working in the best interest of the article. Explicitly working against

3808:

You appear to misunderstand the purpose of user date prefs. The "number of users who actually set the date preference to something non-standard" is not the point; the point is that

2868:

it has absolutely no relevance to the article, the article's general topic or even the references themselves and they do not allow for deeper understanding of the Swedish langauge

4873:

read the text and I've cited it very clearly. If you're provided a reference the onus is on you to read it if you want to challange the statement. That's how verifiability works.

3981: 3012:

And as for edit warring, don't go there yourself. So far you're only bonking me over the head with mostly irrelevant guideline citations instead of trying to discuss the issue.

1515:

add them to External links as I haven't found any relevant information on those web sites. There are also other references that can be used instead for that paragraph, such as

3854:

be linked. (No-one has contradicted me on that so far.) Thus there must be situations where they shouldn't be linked, right? Which situations would that be, in your opinion?

3518:(with guideline being the operative word) - not a detailed document that must be upheld in every aspect everywhere (even in featured articles). As it says right on the top: 2057:

At this point, for Swedish grammar, "en" and "ett" words is verifiable while "common" and "neuter" are not. So a reference is needed. Just find a reference and move on. –

2144:

And Viberg's book calls it the supine. There's still no reference that states the Swedish genders are called "common" and "neuter" so just find a reference and move on. –

1366:

Please reinsert the souces you removed. For anyone that reads the article through in its entirety, it's obvious what those sources have been used for, and the article from

4849:

Reverts are only as hostile as your perceive them. As for additional references, I have added them, so don't imply that it's not enough without examining the diffs first.

1665:

In general, I've noticed that in-line citations have been added to the very end of a section. If those citations are for the entire section, they should be placed at the

3599:

November." As the guidelines say, all full dates should be wikilinked so that these preferences can be given effect. I don't see what is hard to understand about this. --

2895:

It is a generally accepted standard that all editors should follow. However, it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception.

1256:

have to be included in the in-line citation for the Harvbn template. Except for #7, this article's "Notes" section would look identical except for being hyper-linked.

1549:

Looking at the Virtual Finland reference, it actually doesn't support the statement that it cites and should probably be removed unless another reference can be found.

3789:

I'd like to second this. One of the basic complaints about Knowledge (XXG) I get from pepole I know in real life is (who aren't Wikipedians) is that of over-linking.

2906:

to interpret guidelines, i.e. as laws set in stone until proper permission has been granted from users who otherwise seem to have no interest at all in this article.

2825: 2273: 1605:

The US Census is very clearly cited in prose. Failing to see the connection with the mention of it in the sources because there's no footnote doesn't make much sense.

773:

of any. I think it should be removed and explained in her article, instead of this article, especially since it is very far from being a common way to use the colon.

5047:

Constructing three fictitious verbs with the formula discussed confirms absolutely nothing. It only confirms that those verbs don't exist. If anything, look at how

4691:

is "very productive" as a way to create new verbs. It's a claim that is about as trivial as claiming that ”plural endings in English are often made with the ending

605:

apparently didn't like my suggestion, so please suggest another version. Also, if you know non-Swedish editors, it may be helpful to get a 3rd opinion from them.

2091:

constituting one of two genders of a language, esp. a gender comprising nouns that were formerly masculine or feminine: Swedish nouns are either common or neuter.

3705:

So, step 1: Is this a good idea? Step 2: Does anybody know of a software guru who can assert if this is feasible? Step 3: Could we agree on a new consensus?

3318:

Oh, come on! I can't believe you're having a revert war over something as trivial as whether access dates on references should be linked or not. May I suggest a

768:

This is a single, very unusual example about how the colon is used, which is mostly useless for someone learning Swedish. The chances of someone hearing about

4674:

stuck to discussing the article and the accuracy issues and I think it would be prudent if you didn't try to resort to characterizing my actions as hostile.

3086:

all you choose to do is demand that it must take place on your terms and make snide comments at people who refuse to frame the debate in the way you prefer.

2925:

And I do use date formatting in my preferences. It is useful for those who are registered, and does no harm to those who aren't. But that is a topic for the

2866:

Guidelines are guidelines, not policy. I have an extremely good argument against this slavish following of the letter of the law which is very, very simple:

683:

is as short as the current text and is not a bulleted list. I would also argue that it contains more useful examples which are, in fact, not that similar.

3745:

LarRan, I find your argument a bit silly, especially your point C. It only takes one click on a link to learn what's typically at an article titled, e.g.,

4637:"high literacy rate": That's a weasel word. How much is "high"? There is in fact a reference for the 99% literacy rate which I can add when I find time. 4664:

to get comments from the WP community on the FA status of this article if you would like to continue argue whether or not the article needs references. –

3146:

So we're all helpless victims of our own guidelines? I can't tell you what a crappy argument that makes. If users only spent half as much time actually

1455:"Sources" is there to make an overview of the sources more practical. Removing a source from that summary does not improve the verifiability in any way. 5327:

It's not my personal opinion- it's consensus. As for your last statement, it doesn't deserve an answer, its rhetoric rather than constructive comment.

601:

since it has nothing to do with the Swedish alphabet or grammar. Regardless, the current wording in the article is confusing and should be modified.

107:. Even if its use is marginal, it still should be mentioned here. Feel free to change the wording, of course, but please don't delete it completely. -- 4823:

immigrants? You're Swedish and you're an immigrant. Being one does not necessarily exclude the other. Assuming so if the text does not state it is

3850:

And I don't agree with what you say: "for now full dates should be linked". As I mentioned, the guidelines do not say that. They say that they should

2594:

of" doesn't mean to say that a population has stayed the same from a given year, but is supposed to specify when the last time the stats were updated.

1413:

US Census data: there is no mention of the number of Swedish speakers in the US in the article so it doesn't belong in this article. That info is in

3065:, full dates should use wikilinks for formatting. How does removing the links (contrary to both guidelines) in any way benefit the encyclopedia? -- 2833:. If anyone wishes to change this guideline, then go to the relevant talk page and build a consensus. If anyone belives that there is good reason to 850:

I recommedn not using only Knowledge (XXG) articles to define terms. You should look these things up in independent sources instead. See for example

3673:

My impression is that the software authors have confused two good functions: Linking and Date-formatting. The key phrase above is "as for linking".

2696:. I thought pointing out the book title would be enough for anyone since it's so easy to find and because Ferlin is such a famous literary figure. 756:. Also stating "abbreviations, especially an acronym" is incorrect since it has as much to do with numbers, letter, and abbreviations as acronyms. 3921:, unless there is an extremely strong reason not to do so. I'm waiting to hear of any such reasons why dates should not be linked on this page. -- 4852:"Classification": The section is referenced. There is no guideline specifying the number of footnotes require per section, paragraph or sentence. 5426:

panda, do keep in mind that the date formatting issue is hotly contested and rests on very selective reading of guidelines. It has opposed by a

4191:

If you just posted some references instead of complaining about how the article doesn't need more references, this wouldn't be a conflict. The

4062:

Incomplete references (e.g., is it sufficient to only include the name of an encyclopedia and article for an online version of an encyclopedia?)

414:

Of course only those which are unique to Swedish should appear. On this page a couple of examples would be enough and a detailed list can be on

4103:, and I've replied that I don't have the book at hand and thought it enough with just a reference to the title (since Ferlin is so well-known). 3812:, and user date prefs permit users to see dates in the (usually standard) format they prefer. I have my prefs set so that dates display, e.g., 4515:"Official status": Questioning that Swedish is recommended at a gov't level doesn't strike me as having any point other than adding footnotes. 5586:

The dates are currently being displayed as YYYY-MM-DD to the overwhelming majority of our readers who don't happen to be registered users.

748:"a colon can appear ... between a word (or abbreviation, especially an acronym) and certain grammatical suffixes" would imply that it can 4534:), as original research makes absolutely no sense. There is basically no other way to create a new verb in Swedish other than to add an 2304:

I don't see how anyone could possibly get a deeper understanding of the Swedish language by being linked to web reference access dates.

5055:

are formed. Your claims can't possibly contradict a statement that merely refers to a certain type of word formation as "productive".

4549:

As for the request to clarify the origins of a boy with two Swedish parents, I can't help but wondering what exactly needs clarifying.

3866:

I, for one, have no problem understanding November 27, though I mostly write that date as 27 November. I guess that goes for all of us.

2782:...and why do you keep stating that the 5.5% is only true as of 2006? The statistics clearly show that it has been true since 2004. – 1753:

to do with the article topic and is there for nothing but a distraction. Insisting that they be linked serves no encyclopedic purpose.

1153: 3522:. It would be better if you could argue why the article would be better with your suggestions, rather than to just quote guidelines. 1976: 1326:

The Dagens Industri citation is incomplete and needs the article's title. Please replace if they should be listed for some reason. –

5201:

more reason to discourage its use and put up with the several major formattings for dates, just as we do the varieties of spelling.

5162: 4721:

I've removed the comment on literacy altogether since it's not necessary for the text and since it only appears to breed contention.

1614:

If you want "more references", you should try to explain where and why. Preferably without claiming personal ignorance or that the

945:

It certainly interests me as a student of linguistics and as someone who has interest in typography and machine text processing. --

3458:

to stand on though. Frankly, you're both being stubborn and making every point a battleground instead of trying to work together.

1267: 5146:

Together with Swedish and Danish, Norwegian forms a continuum of more or less mutually intelligible local and regional variants.

4634:. AFAIK, the boy's native language could have been Swedish, in which case, it really has nothing to do with immigrant variants. 3943:, especially as it's contradicted by another guideline. The arguments have been listed above. So let's stick to the guidelines. 1749:

MOS is a recommendation, and not every single aspect of it is a requirement. The date someone looked up a web reference has has

1178: 737:"in a manner similar to the English apostrophe" and "mostly the genitive ending -s" would imply that "Peter's" would be written 5705: 5700: 5688: 5683: 5678: 5609:

We're supposed to avoid any ambiguity... Even the MoS recommends using "9 February 2007" or the likes instead of just digits.

1458:

kommunerna.net is and Statistics Finland are as far as I know the sources for the first paragraph of "Geographic distribution".

86: 81: 69: 64: 59: 2639:

And before we get into a heated argument about how many people speak Swedish as opposed to how many people speak Swedish as a

1177:

Does anyone have anything against modifying the current reference system to one that links the notes to the references (using

3552:

follow the guidelines instead of ignoring consensus. Especially considering "Knowledge (XXG) works by building consensus." –

5633: 4099:

How much of the article that needs referencing has yet to be revealed by panda. He's asked for a specific page reference of

5572:

It's much more helpful if you could be more specific with what the problem is and could give an example of what you mean. –

4967:"Finland Swedish": Swedish wasn't dominant in terms of absolute numbers, but it's status. Even famous Finnish authors like 4909:

clear that that one reference applies to both paragraph. Explaining in the talk page does not make up for this deficiency.

4476:. If they say the article doesn't need any changes, then you've proven me wrong and I'll gladly leave the article alone. – 3414:

What I said definitely applies to Peter too, but treating other editors with respect isn't and shouldn't be conditional on

1542:. For example, the date a web article was retrieved is standard practice to include when citing web references. See also 5140:. I am a native speaker of English but speak fluent Swedish and somewhat less than fluent Norwegian (I read and translate 4996:. Then prove your statement with a reference, otherwise remove it. It is a contested statement and needs to be verified. 4182:

I'm taking a wikivacation. I'll be happy to reply to any other relevant reference claims you might have when I get back.

3325:

Peter, it doesn't really make the article appreciably worse to have them linked. Lurker, your decision to slap Peter with

1104:

seems to be a relatively new effort to do just that (Started in 2005). I'm not sure how widespread or known it is though.

1088: 4952:

and that the references are complete enough. If that's the case, then prove it by putting this article up for review in

2344: 5340: 5296: 5251: 4609:

Who claims that new Swedish verbs are created by adding -a to an existing noun? There are probably more examples of it

3639: 3366: 3175: 3150:

this article as enforcing guideline fundamentalism on it, we wouldn't even have to suggest that it needs any reviewing.

3099: 3034: 2971: 2942: 2856: 2370: 2298:

As a general rule of thumb, link to one of these pages only if it is likely to deepen readers' understanding of a topic.

4865:"Immigrant variants": If "Rinkeby Swedish" is such an inappropriate term, why have you spent so many edits working on 3994: 1535: 716:

Since you don't seem to be convinced that the current text about the colon is confusing, let's evaluate it piecemeal:

4066:

If someone on this page could clarify some of these points, that'd be helpful to whomever gives a 3O here. Thanks! —

2882:

was the target of a military coup on the same date. It does not advance any readers understanding of Swedish. Period.

830:

article, "In traditional grammar, a contraction is the formation of a new word from two or more individual words" so

117:

You should really ask about these things on talkpages before adding potentially misleading information to articles.

5657: 4781:

sense. If you're only interested in long word examples that can actually be used, then why not use something that

622:. A short note on the colon usage seems okay, but not tedious bullet lists with lots of awfully similar examples. 38: 1868:"Common" and "neuter" are indeed the English terms for Swedish gender, according to the general works that I have. 1768:

grammar of the Swedish language. That the Academy has sponsored more basic grammars is another matter altogether.

1735:, for preference formatting purposes. So I'm changing the references that you modified back to reflect this. – 2419:

That the insertion of all those citation templates obscured the addition of a footnote. It's been reinserted.

5632:

I've made a Wikiquette alert concerning panda's behavior related to this article. You can find the report at

4577:

Classification: There are 2 paragraphs, and each paragraph has plenty of statements that need citations for

3917:. However, given the obvious benefits of date formatting, as long as the software works the way it does now, 2447:

I did read the source and the proper way to write the figure 5.49% (the stat given for 2006) is in fact 5.5%.

2258:

Your refusal to accept general sources in favor of that dinky textbook of yours is intellectually dishonest.

5177: 5106: 4879:

is clearly cited in the sources. It does not require a page number since the reference is extremely obvious.

2479:

was completely uncalled for. You could try to "put more hard work into research of decent external sources"

1410:

Statistics Finland: also no clue why it was cited. Doesn't matter if you read the article. Please explain.

1243:

aren't in multiple columns and the highlighting doesn't work for you, it's probably because you're using IE.

5150: 4702:

The new long word example you introduced could never, ever be used in a normal sentence. It's more akin to

1149: 4651:

and not claiming ownership. As the author of the text, you should be adding the references according to

4282: 1312: 1157: 769: 5144:

but do not delude myself that I speak it.) All I did was add the words, "more or less" to the following:

4643: 4192: 4158: 4092: 3545: 3211: 2874:

on 27 November 2007 has nothing to do with the fact that Pope Urban II declared the First Crusade at the

1516: 5666: 5158: 3330:

excuse for a deficiency in the MediaWiki software and (as has been noted) can be confusing for readers.

2334: 2285: 1874: 887: 873:

How important is it that the English language Knowledge (XXG) include discussion of Swedish punctuation?

827: 731: 103:. I guessed the meaning, but couldn't find any clear explanation at this article. I finally found it at 47: 17: 4522:, the one basic verb ending in Swedish (the exceptions mostly being extremely old and basic verbs like 4301:, which gives a list of many articles that use the "As of" statement for stats and other statements. – 3520:"However, it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception." 3058: 1732: 1686:

Are you going to find the page number for Barfotabarn? If not, I plan to change it to a web reference.

211:

Du skall ha tre valsedlar: en gul (riksdagsval), en blå (landstingsval) och en vit (kommunfullmäktige).

4819:

proposing text changes instead. How do you know that stating both parents are Swedish means they are

4797:("intoxicating drink sales ordinance", which means the ordinance for the sale of alcoholic beverages). 3873:

in date formats. What method would you use to accomplish that in this article without date linking? --

2647:. The amount of people in Finland that speak Swedish is much higher than the number of Finland Swedes. 5228: 4858:"Vocabulary": If want to introduce new words, you're welcome to do so. However, your claim about the 4026:

Hi. I'm not giving a 3O, but I'm putting the following here, since it was originally on the 3O page:

4003: 3905:

I'm not "confusing" anything; I'm just acknowledging the reality of how the MediaWiki software works

2280:, dates with month, day, and year should be wikilinked to enable users' date formatting preferences. 1527: 1466: 1319: 658:= "Saint"), and all types of suffixes that can be added to numbers, letters and abbreviations (e.g., 539:= "Saint"), and all types of suffixes that can be added to numbers, letters and abbreviations (e.g., 2926: 2576: 1126: 3686:, I don't remember their names - defined for this purpose? It could look like this: <usdate: --> 3137: 2879: 2875: 1539: 1407:

kommunerna.net: no clue why it was cited. Doesn't matter if you read the article. Please explain.

1130: 615: 127: 104: 4585: 1092: 687:

is a very special case that isn't at all useful for someone learning Swedish. We can removed the

153:

I think the text about the colon could use some examples and/or be further explained. Looking at

5637: 5610: 5587: 5564: 5552: 5475: 5440: 5351: 5311: 5173: 5137: 5128: 5102: 5056: 5020: 4979: 4884: 4726: 4550: 4183: 4119: 4110: 3985: 3790: 3666:

The word "all" is not present - at least where I looked (and I used the link that was provided).

3617: 3583: 3563: 3277: 3234: 3202: 3192: 3151: 3070: 3049: 3013: 2999:

should be the one to redefine guidelines as strict rules that no one should be allowed to flaunt.

2907: 2871: 2697: 2566: 2503: 2470: 2420: 2382: 2348: 2305: 2259: 2183: 2120: 2103:

noting or pertaining to a gender that refers to things classed as neither masculine nor feminine.

2027: 1942: 1794: 1676:

YYYY-MM-DD format. At any rate, a consistent format should definitely be used. I've fixed this.

1623: 1482: 1388: 1377: 1271: 1212: 1034: 855: 818: 623: 602: 576: 365: 140: 118: 4750: 4695:". All the examples you've provided of this not being true are actually examples of the formula 4631: 4603: 4294: 4031: 3488: 3214:

of it? If so, then maybe you should reconsider the purpose and philosophy of Knowledge (XXG). –

2834: 2430: 2330: 1777: 5325:

to counter your personal opinion in order to be allowed to choose their prefered article layout

4774:

until there is a reference that supports it. I've already stated why I contest that statement.

4197: 4162: 896:

It's almost as important as including an article about the Swedish language in the first place.

5307: 4939:

article. I've already told you what is wrong with the text here, so it's time to just fix it.

4067: 3967: 3926: 3455: 2281: 1899:

It would be nice if we could get a reference for that. My grammar book simply calls them the

1186: 1072: 965: 950: 882:

What person who does not read Swedish will need to consider the use of the colon in Swedish?

5390:, and the relevant part merely says that dates usually should be linked, not that they must. 4770:

No matter what your personal opinion is about making new verbs, the entire sentence is still

4415: 4298: 4290: 4277: 4127: 4123: 3326: 3062: 2891:, then why not heed this rather fitting passage from the description of what a guideline is: 2719: 1554: 1543: 5538: 5399: 5334: 5290: 5270: 5245: 5154: 4459: 4427: 4391: 4359: 4264: 4231: 4056: 3948: 3896: 3777: 3731: 3633: 3531: 3467: 3427: 3385: 3360: 3339: 3169: 3093: 3028: 2965: 2936: 2850: 2364: 2241: 1870: 1113: 883: 619: 594: 415: 361: 139:

The information in the colon article is correct, but the way it was reworded here was not.

5551:

Good idea, I suppose. A toning down of the hostilities across the board would be helpful.

4953: 4661: 4648: 4473: 4286: 3492: 3480: 2839: 2715: 385:"It also occurs in certain names, for example Antonia Ax:son Johnson (Ax:son for Axelson)." 5600: 5577: 5520:(unindent) I'm going to stop arguing and roll up my sleeves and try to do something about 5488: 5457: 5417: 5224: 5212: 4928: 4866: 4206: 4148: 3999: 3441: 3405: 3290: 3219: 2787: 2727: 2584: 2517: 2492: 2438: 2410: 2249: 2217: 2149: 2062: 1984: 1912: 1836: 1740: 1696: 1570: 1436: 1356: 1331: 1293: 1182: 692: 598: 5525:

walking away for now can reduce conflicts it's probably worthwhile. I hope you can agree.

4993: 4921: 4914: 4895: 4824: 4771: 4615: 4165:

and please don't bring up the population issue again unless you read these stats through

4131: 3484: 2710: 2405:. And no, it's not the same one you replaced it with. What's your rationale for that? – 762:

It also occurs in certain names, for example Antonia Ax:son Johnson (Ax:son for Axelson).

5320:

What you're doing by revert warring in this article and denying those interpretations...

4869:

without ever raising the issue there? As for Kotsinas, I know what I'm saying because I

1461:

The 2004 US Census is very clearly cited in prose. Look under "Geographic distribution".

1420:

Even if something is arranged alphabetically, the page number(s) should still be stated.

1143: 5640: 5613: 5604: 5590: 5581: 5567: 5555: 5545: 5492: 5478: 5461: 5443: 5435:

revert to the status quo and re-think one's strategy. Try asking yourself whether this

5421: 5406: 5354: 5344: 5314: 5300: 5277: 5255: 5232: 5217: 5181: 5166: 5131: 5110: 5069: 5059: 5042: 5023: 5005: 4982: 4968: 4960: 4887: 4844: 4729: 4668: 4561:

Re: Removing citations requests simply because you don't see the purpose of them: From

4553: 4480: 4466: 4444: 4434: 4408: 4398: 4376: 4366: 4344: 4329: 4321: 4305: 4271: 4249: 4238: 4210: 4186: 4152: 4113: 4088: 4077: 4007: 3988: 3971: 3952: 3930: 3900: 3877: 3858: 3833: 3793: 3784: 3762: 3738: 3709: 3643: 3626:

dates are displayed but have other dates foisted on them? Consistency is a good thing.

3620: 3603: 3586: 3576: 3566: 3556: 3538: 3500: 3474: 3448: 3434: 3409: 3392: 3370: 3346: 3294: 3280: 3238: 3223: 3205: 3201:

I wrote 75% of the article content and brought in the vast majority of the references.

3196: 3179: 3154: 3141: 3133: 3103: 3074: 3052: 3038: 3016: 2975: 2946: 2910: 2860: 2791: 2731: 2706: 2700: 2644: 2640: 2588: 2569: 2521: 2506: 2496: 2473: 2442: 2423: 2414: 2385: 2374: 2351: 2337: 2308: 2288: 2262: 2253: 2221: 2186: 2153: 2123: 2066: 2030: 1988: 1945: 1916: 1878: 1840: 1797: 1744: 1700: 1626: 1574: 1485: 1440: 1414: 1391: 1380: 1360: 1335: 1274: 1260: 1215: 1198: 1161: 1137: 1120: 1095: 1076: 1037: 969: 954: 891: 868: 858: 843: 821: 781: 626: 609: 588: 579: 568: 497: 480: 459: 406: 368: 354: 143: 134: 121: 111: 5474:!" when confronted with complaints about one's behavior is not a convincing strategy. 4974:"Vocabulary": Texts aren't OR simply because you claim they are. Please be reasonable. 4949: 4652: 4578: 4571: 4562: 4091:. This is easily refuted by checking out alternative (but less specific) sources like 2709:

article uses the same source for its statistics and should also be fixed. It's still

1786: 1655: 5323:

your actions seem unilateral. But I've requested protection to stop this revert war.

5136:

I recently made an adjustment to claims of mutual intellibility in the article about

4660:

From my stand-point, we're not progressing. I would suggest listing this article in

4450:

leave you alone for a few days to give you a chance to actually improve the article.

3230: 3188: 3066: 1504:

Removing sources that are not cited does not affect the verifiability of the article.

1129:, Test In Swedish for University Studies. But that might be more appropriate in the 851: 2433:, which you seem to be ignoring for some unknown reason when you write your dates. – 3963: 3922: 3874: 3830: 3759: 3600: 2718:

limit so I'll ask you to please stop reverting simply because you don't agree with

1240: 1235: 1231: 1190: 1068: 961: 946: 585: 494: 456: 347: 131: 108: 1270:, I would certainly see the point, but not here. Otherwise, I'm fine either way. 4905:

Classification: That section has a single reference for two paragraphs and it is

3939:

be linked". Don't cut out the word "normally". It indicates that it doesn't mean

3418:

good behavior. He poked me first simply isn't an acceptable defense around here.

5665:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

5531: 5392: 5328: 5284: 5263: 5239: 4932: 4452: 4420: 4384: 4352: 4257: 4224: 3944: 3892: 3855: 3770: 3746: 3724: 3706: 3627: 3524: 3460: 3420: 3378: 3354: 3332: 3163: 3110: 3087: 3045: 3022: 2959: 2930: 2888: 2844: 2358: 2322: 2105: 2093: 1189:

for the References section)? There's a good example of this implemented in the

1106: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

4753:

contradict this (in 1900, only 12.89% of the population were Swedish speakers).

752:

be used with all grammatical suffixes. That's actually incorrect according to

593:

I agree that information about the colon should be in this article, and not in

281:

for all types of suffixes that can be added to numbers, letters, abbreviations:

5596: 5573: 5484: 5453: 5413: 5205: 5066: 5039: 5002: 4957: 4841: 4665: 4477: 4441: 4405: 4373: 4341: 4326: 4302: 4246: 4202: 4144: 3681:

allows users to have dates displayed according to their preferences (if any).

3573: 3553: 3497: 3445: 3401: 3286: 3215: 2783: 2723: 2580: 2513: 2488: 2434: 2406: 2274:

Knowledge (XXG):Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Autoformatting and linking

2245: 2213: 2145: 2058: 2023: 1980: 1908: 1832: 1736: 1692: 1566: 1432: 1352: 1327: 1257: 1195: 1134: 865: 840: 778: 606: 565: 477: 403: 351: 99:

I added the part about the colon because i kept seeing it at the main page of

5563:

someone doesn't convert that to a less ambiguous format pretty soon, I will.

4276:

Stats that vary over the years should be reported accurately and precisely.

1387:

Also, is it really necessary to use all that excess code for web citations?

5431: 4948:

You seem to still believe the article contains enough references to satisfy

4763:

What was your reason for reverting the text? If you only wanted to replace

3044:

is really the most pertinent issue in this discussion. How does the article

1531: 1142:

In Finland there would be the National Certificate of Language Proficiency (

3982:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Linking full dates

1941:

Which grammar are you refering to, panda. Is it in English or in Swedish?

374:

but more than one example makes sense since the current text is confusing:

4118:

In case it isn't obvious, the two editors who are having this dispute are

864:

off-topic. I've already updated the text about the colon in the article.

5452:

is worth fighting for"? (I'm not the one reverting and edit warring.) –

3048:

in any way further anyone's general understanding of the article topic?

2314: 1728: 1673: 727: 695:, but all of them are common examples used in everyday writing and signs. 584:

Well, what about a bullet list? I don't think that this is so obscure. --

5483:

Have you answered the question yet? Is it really worth fighting for? –

4812:"immigrant dialect" instead of Rinkeby Swedish until a ref can be found. 631:

Good that we both agree it has nothing to do with grammar. My example:

5521: 5471: 3113:

in any way further anyone's general understanding of the article topic?

2487:, which isn't campaigning. Please try to refrain from exaggerating. – 4745:

History: If what you say is true, then add the references to prove it.

2278:

Knowledge (XXG):Only make links that are relevant to the context#Dates

1672:

Dates do not need to be spelled out. It is sufficient to put them in

5141: 3914: 3548:, it would be better if you/Peter could argue why the article should 2116: 1101: 4044:

Whether or not "first language" can be implied from the statistics (

1662:"common" or "neuter"? My grammar book uses different English terms. 1608:

The NE articles are from the online version, which is now specified.

4971:, the author of the Finnish national anthem, were Swedish-speakers. 4894:"Reverts are only as hostile as your perceive them." Is that why 1340:

The following references (in the Notes section) need page numbers:

1307: 726:

The most common ways to use an apostrophe in English are with the

4789:(resident permit application questions), or a real example that 4538:(except by making a compound with one of the exceptional verbs). 3980:

I've started a thread concerning the date formatting dispute at

3319: 2326: 2318: 1727:

It turns out that full dates should be linked, according to the

1234:

article to see how it works. Ignore the "Notes" section in the

976: 614:

This has nothing to do with grammar. It's about orthography and

190:

Frågan är: Vem avgör vad som är sanning eller lögn i denna sak?"

1318:(Washington DC: US English Foundation, 2005, based on the 2004 5644: 5223:

I share Tony's assessment and support the moves here on this.

2469:"Sources" for overview purpose. I've reinserted the footnote. 442:(in most languages it would be something like 10.50 or 10,50). 25: 4902:? A reminder that you have yet to explain why you reverted. 3822:

regardless of how they are entered in wikitext by the editor

2870:. That I, or anyone else, chose to check out the website of 1303: 813:

wanting to learn Swedish is not any of our concern. We have

2333:" should be wikilinked solely to enable date preferences. — 879:

Readers of Swedish can consult Swedish language references.

464:

When you say "the last part is pretty unique", do you mean

2087:

Here's how dictionary.com defines "common gender" (13 b):

203:

for examples, explanations, specifications, and summaries:

3663:, by inserting double square-brackets, as for linking.". 2294:

The guideline has this to say about random date linking:

854:. There are plenty of one-word contractions in English. 3957:

The question is: If the guidelines say something should

100: 5117: 5030:

Finland Swedish: Once again, prove it with a reference.

4568:

the text that supports the article content in question.

4136: 4049: 4045: 4039: 4035: 2480: 2403: 2284:

saves you some time by wikilinking the dates for you. —

1764:

is not just any old grammar. At over 2,800 pages, it's

3913:. If you want to submit this as a feature request, go 3677:

connects two articles that are meaningful to connect.

2026:

for an example of the definition of "common gender".

224:

in certain expressions with numbers and abbreviations:

3514:

As Peter has pointed out earlier, the MOS is a style

3285:

Try re-reading the thread just above this one then. –

2692:

You're welcome to add whatever reference you want to

1315:

English in America: A Study of Linguistic Integration

1144:

http://www.oph.fi/english/page.asp?path=447,574,51431

4418:

for articles in even more dire need of improvement.

814: 691:

example if you really want since I've added that to

642:= "10 kronor and 50 öre"), for abbreviations (e.g., 523:= "10 kronor and 50 öre"), for abbreviations (e.g., 4815:

dialects vs sociolects: needs refs to support this.

5430:of editors in different venues and does not enjoy 3544:Actually, considering the guidelines are based on 1560:In general, the article could use more references. 1370:is thoroughly specified (and quoted) in the notes. 634:In Swedish, the colon is used with numbers (e.g., 515:In Swedish, the colon is used with numbers (e.g., 468:or the last set of examples I gave (starting with 4924:until you can find a citation to prove otherwise. 4827:. If the text does state it, then make it clear. 4778:produktionsstyrningssystemsprogramvaruuppdatering 4767:, then you could have done that without a revert. 4765:produktionsstyrningssystemsprogramvaruuppdatering 4320:The 5.5% stats have now been updated. I removed 394:) and doesn't necessarily have to do with a name. 4687:The article makes only one claim, which is that 4140: 2321:...", which is not a good idea. Things like "On 2313:That's referring to wikilinking things like "In 1417:, so I can add the reference there if necessary. 455:And of course the last part is pretty unique. -- 237:Job 14:1-3 (Jobs bok, kapitel 14, vers 1 till 3) 174:Hamlet: Att vara eller inte vara, det är frågan. 130:. If it is incorrect, both should be changed. -- 5196:Some months ago, I decided to encourage WPians 5192:Date autoformatting is sick and not being fixed 4927:Immigrant variants: Talking about edits to the 5204:I support moves here not to autoformat dates. 4083:Let's break this up into two separate issues: 242:Land 1998:3 eller Land 3/1998 (nummer 3, 1998) 157:(2nd ed, 2002, p 154-156), the colon is used: 979:not containing a section on how to make beer. 8: 5634:Knowledge (XXG):Wikiquette alerts#User:Panda 5527:(I've posted a similar note to Peter's talk) 4718:Rinkeby Swedish is a very complicated topic. 4032:statistics about languages spoken in Finland 2240:Problem solved. Reference found, thanks to 346:.) I believe the last one was the one that 330:Karl XII:s likfärd (Karl den toftes likfärd) 4604:a hostile and inappropriate editing climate 4289:to be as precise as possible, according to 247:skala 1:50 000 (skala ett till femtiotusen) 216:Nu förstod jag plötsligt: mannen var blind. 169:Leende frågade han: "Är du alldeles säker?" 5448:Ok, have you asked "yourself whether this 4122:and I. Regarding the stats, according to 4699:. I don't understand your reasoning here. 2483:'Sources'" -- I wrote something about it 4920:Vocabulary: The new words text is still 1793:prefer them as a lack of verifiability. 1526:in the English Knowledge (XXG), such as 440:10:50 kronor (tio kronor och femtio öre) 390:is an example of an abbreviation (e.g., 232:10:50 kronor (tio kronor och femtio öre) 1400:Regarding the sources mentioned above: 195:Mitt förslag är: Gratis cyklar åt alla! 5663:Do not edit the contents of this page. 4440:refs that anyone could find and add. – 4372:sentence. So you can help as well. – 3935:The guidelines say "full dates should 1082:Swedish as a foreign language diplomas 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3909:, which is what we have to deal with 7: 3210:...does that mean you want to claim 126:The information i added is based on 4787:uppehållstillståndsansökningsfrågor 4139:. But this is just a repeat of the 3487:status. So if working towards the 1179:Knowledge (XXG):Harvard referencing 4034:, and is the data applicable from 3063:WP:DATE#Autoformatting and linking 2565:absorbing the article as a whole. 2099:And here's "neuter gender" (1 a): 24: 3962:let's stick to the guidelines! -- 2995:enforce guidelines this strictly 1091:. What do you think about it? -- 5648: 3688:, or like this: <isodate: --> 3687:January 15, 2001</usdate: --> 1268:Scotland in the High Middle Ages 1181:without brackets, that is using 314:vd:ar (verkställande direktörer) 29: 4900:Avoid reverts whenever possible 4795:rusdrycksförsäljningsförordning 4518:"Vocabulary": Questioning that 2705:In case you didn't notice, the 1831:understand how this is done. – 299:linje 10:s väg (linje tios väg) 182:before a question or statement: 3824:. ], ] will display for me as 335:förf.:s, förf:s (författarens) 1: 5641:04:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC) 5614:19:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 5605:15:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 5591:09:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 5582:19:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5568:17:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5556:10:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC) 5546:07:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC) 5493:04:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC) 5479:03:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC) 5462:03:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC) 5444:03:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC) 5182:00:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC) 4306:16:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC) 4272:15:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC) 4250:15:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC) 4239:07:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC) 4211:23:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 4187:18:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 4153:18:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 4114:18:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 4078:17:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 4059:article needs referencing and 3501:20:41, 30 November 2007 (UTC) 3483:, which is part of achieving 3475:19:32, 30 November 2007 (UTC) 3449:17:46, 30 November 2007 (UTC) 3435:07:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC) 3410:23:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3393:20:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3371:18:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3347:17:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3295:16:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3281:16:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3239:16:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3224:16:11, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3206:16:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3197:15:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3180:19:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3155:15:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3142:15:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3104:15:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3075:15:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3053:14:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3039:14:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 3017:14:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2976:14:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2947:14:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2911:14:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2861:13:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2792:16:59, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2732:16:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2701:16:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2589:15:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2570:07:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2522:18:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2507:17:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2497:16:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2474:09:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2443:02:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2424:01:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2415:00:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2386:07:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2375:19:00, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2352:08:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2338:04:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2309:00:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2289:23:23, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 2272:About wikilinking dates: per 2263:07:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 2254:23:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2222:18:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2187:17:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2154:16:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2124:09:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2067:02:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 2031:01:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 1989:00:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 1946:00:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 1917:20:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 1879:20:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 1841:19:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 1798:19:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 1745:17:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 1701:16:59, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 1627:09:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 1575:04:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 1486:17:21, 26 November 2007 (UTC) 1441:15:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC) 1392:10:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC) 1381:09:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC) 1361:19:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC) 1336:18:49, 25 November 2007 (UTC) 1162:13:24, 21 November 2007 (UTC) 1089:Swedish as a foreign language 1077:11:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 1038:09:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 970:02:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 955:21:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 892:21:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 360:Keep in mind that this isn't 5422:18:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC) 5407:16:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC) 5355:16:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC) 5345:16:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC) 5315:07:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC) 5301:16:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 5278:16:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 5256:15:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 5233:11:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 5218:00:30, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 5167:23:06, 9 December 2007 (UTC) 5132:12:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 5111:07:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 5070:02:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 5060:01:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 5043:01:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 5024:01:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 5006:01:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 4983:01:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 4961:01:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 4888:00:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 4845:16:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 4730:11:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 4669:04:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 4554:02:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 4481:01:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 4467:01:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 4445:00:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 4435:00:24, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 4409:00:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 4399:23:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 4377:18:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 4367:17:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 4345:16:33, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 4330:16:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 4297:. You may also want to see 4255:been appropriate there too. 4008:13:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 3989:13:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 3972:01:30, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 3953:00:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 3931:04:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC) 3901:04:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC) 3878:20:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 3859:04:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 3834:04:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 3810:there are multiple standards 3794:00:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 3785:00:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 3763:00:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 3739:23:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 3710:21:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 3644:14:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 3621:14:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 3604:13:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 3587:11:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 3577:04:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 3567:02:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 3557:17:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 3539:17:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 2887:And if we're going to start 1762:Svenska Akademiens grammatik 1600:Svenska Akademiens grammatik 1477:those dates or this article. 1275:07:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC) 1261:14:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC) 1216:09:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC) 1199:17:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC) 1138:16:19, 30 October 2007 (UTC) 1121:15:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC) 1096:13:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC) 876:What reader will this serve? 869:07:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC) 859:06:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC) 844:17:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC) 822:16:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC) 787:for English Knowledge (XXG). 782:15:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC) 627:12:50, 3 November 2007 (UTC) 610:16:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC) 589:14:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC) 580:05:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC) 569:17:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC) 498:07:56, 23 October 2007 (UTC) 481:15:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC) 460:08:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC) 407:22:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC) 369:21:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC) 355:21:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC) 273:klockan 13:10, tiden 1:40:02 144:11:58, 21 October 2007 (UTC) 135:11:45, 21 October 2007 (UTC) 122:11:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC) 112:11:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC) 3919:full dates should be linked 3689:2001-01-15</isodate: --> 2843:because you don't like it. 1785:As for the article failing 1536:The Chicago Manual of Style 1173:Modifying reference system? 618:is currently a redirect to 5724: 5466:panda, simply crying "no, 4935:since we're talking about 4751:Statistics Finland numbers 4704:flaggstångsknoppsreparatör 1618:of footnotes isn't enough. 1230:Please take a look at the 319:FN:s (Förenta Nationernas) 289:4:e gången (fjärde gången) 4245:independent of Sweden. – 1185:for inline citations and 640:tio kronor och femtio öre 521:tio kronor och femtio öre 5595:And the problem is...? – 4291:WP:DATE#Precise language 4124:WP:DATE#Precise language 1344:1. Crystal, Scandinavian 511:So how about this then: 411:Thanks for the examples. 5439:is worth fighting for. 4662:Featured Article Review 4584:Re: weasel words. See 4285:. It is a part of the 4283:accuracy with precision 4281:be precise. Don't mix 2119:form, not a "-t verb". 1313:US English Foundation, 741:(incorrect) instead of 438:are special, and so is 382:Also the text stating: 5096:Mutually intelligible? 4913:That text seems to be 3322:to resolve the issue? 2115:, for example, is the 770:Antonia Ax:son Johnson 5661:of past discussions. 3376:that exacerbates it. 3109:How does the article 265:for stating the time: 101:http://www.europa.eu/ 42:of past discussions. 18:Talk:Swedish language 4649:acting in good faith 2902:good example of how 1528:The MLA Style Manual 1467:Nationalencyklopedin 678:= "the television"). 559:= "the television"). 4804:Immigrant variants: 4137:already been stated 2880:Carlos Andres Perez 2876:Council of Clermont 1540:Harvard referencing 1131:Education in Sweden 754:Svenska skrivreglar 616:Swedish orthography 350:was interested in. 344:Svenska skrivreglar 342:(Examples are from 309:tv:n (televisionen) 155:Svenska skrivregler 128:Colon (punctuation) 105:Colon (punctuation) 5544: 5405: 5276: 4931:article is just a 4465: 4433: 4397: 4365: 4270: 4237: 4120:User:Peter Isotalo 3783: 3737: 3537: 3473: 3433: 3391: 3345: 2927:relevant talk page 2872:Statistics Finland 1751:absolutely nothing 1308:Statistics Finland 1119: 294:54:an (femtifyran) 5711: 5710: 5673: 5672: 5667:current talk page 5543: 5530: 5528: 5404: 5391: 5308:instruction creep 5275: 5262: 5261:improve matters. 5169: 5153:comment added by 4992:Vocabulary: Read 4785:be used, such as 4464: 4451: 4432: 4419: 4396: 4383: 4364: 4351: 4269: 4256: 4236: 4223: 4167:in their entirety 3782: 3769: 3736: 3723: 3536: 3523: 3472: 3459: 3432: 3419: 3390: 3377: 3344: 3331: 3059:WP:OVERLINK#Dates 2282:Template:cite web 1187:Template:Citation 1164: 1152:comment added by 1118: 1105: 826:According to the 670:= "the first a", 551:= "the first a", 161:before citations: 92: 91: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 5715: 5697: 5675: 5674: 5652: 5651: 5645: 5628:Wikiquette alert 5541: 5536: 5534: 5526: 5402: 5397: 5395: 5331: 5287: 5273: 5268: 5266: 5242: 5215: 5210: 5148: 4462: 4457: 4455: 4430: 4425: 4423: 4394: 4389: 4387: 4362: 4357: 4355: 4267: 4262: 4260: 4234: 4229: 4227: 4074: 4071: 4057:Swedish language 4055:How much of the 3818:December 3, 2007 3780: 3775: 3773: 3734: 3729: 3727: 3630: 3534: 3529: 3527: 3470: 3465: 3463: 3430: 3425: 3423: 3388: 3383: 3381: 3357: 3342: 3337: 3335: 3320:duel in the dawn 3166: 3090: 3025: 2962: 2933: 2847: 2361: 2345:ignore the rules 2335:Remember the dot 2286:Remember the dot 1302: 1291: 1147: 1116: 1111: 1109: 620:Swedish alphabet 595:Swedish alphabet 485:Everything from 416:Swedish alphabet 362:Swedish alphabet 326:(member of IOGT) 304:första a:t i apa 78: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 5723: 5722: 5718: 5717: 5716: 5714: 5713: 5712: 5693: 5649: 5630: 5539: 5532: 5400: 5393: 5329: 5285: 5271: 5264: 5240: 5213: 5206: 5194: 5098: 4929:Rinkeby Swedish 4867:Rinkeby Swedish 4503: 4460: 4453: 4428: 4421: 4392: 4385: 4360: 4353: 4265: 4258: 4232: 4225: 4193:Virtual Finland 4072: 4069: 4024: 3826:3 December 2007 3814:3 December 2007 3778: 3771: 3732: 3725: 3679:Date-formatting 3628: 3532: 3525: 3481:style guideline 3468: 3461: 3428: 3421: 3386: 3379: 3355: 3340: 3333: 3164: 3088: 3023: 2960: 2931: 2845: 2826:manual of style 2822: 2359: 2329:" or "Accessed 2178:("neuter") and 1669:of the section. 1300: 1294:Dagens Industri 1289: 1183:Template:Harvnb 1175: 1114: 1107: 1084: 1069:Amir E. Aharoni 947:Amir E. Aharoni 693:Swedish grammar 599:Swedish grammar 586:Amir E. Aharoni 495:Amir E. Aharoni 457:Amir E. Aharoni 348:Amir E. Aharoni 132:Amir E. Aharoni 109:Amir E. Aharoni 97: 74: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5721: 5719: 5709: 5708: 5703: 5698: 5691: 5686: 5681: 5671: 5670: 5653: 5629: 5626: 5625: 5624: 5623: 5622: 5621: 5620: 5619: 5618: 5617: 5616: 5559: 5558: 5518: 5517: 5516: 5515: 5514: 5513: 5512: 5511: 5510: 5509: 5508: 5507: 5506: 5505: 5504: 5503: 5502: 5501: 5500: 5499: 5498: 5497: 5496: 5495: 5370: 5369: 5368: 5367: 5366: 5365: 5364: 5363: 5362: 5361: 5360: 5359: 5358: 5357: 5193: 5190: 5189: 5188: 5187: 5186: 5185: 5184: 5123: 5122: 5097: 5094: 5093: 5092: 5091: 5090: 5089: 5088: 5087: 5086: 5085: 5084: 5083: 5082: 5081: 5080: 5079: 5078: 5077: 5076: 5075: 5074: 5073: 5072: 5036: 5035: 5034: 5031: 5018: 5017: 5016: 5013: 4999: 4998: 4997: 4990: 4977: 4976: 4975: 4972: 4969:Johan Runeberg 4946: 4945: 4944: 4940: 4925: 4918: 4910: 4903: 4882: 4881: 4880: 4874: 4863: 4856: 4853: 4838: 4837: 4836: 4831: 4830: 4829: 4828: 4816: 4813: 4806: 4805: 4801: 4800: 4799: 4798: 4793:used, such as 4775: 4768: 4758: 4757: 4754: 4746: 4743: 4736: 4724: 4723: 4722: 4719: 4710: 4709: 4708: 4707: 4700: 4682: 4681: 4678: 4657: 4656: 4640: 4639: 4638: 4635: 4626: 4625: 4624: 4623: 4619: 4607: 4597: 4596: 4593: 4589: 4582: 4575: 4547: 4546: 4539: 4516: 4513: 4510: 4502: 4499: 4498: 4497: 4496: 4495: 4494: 4493: 4492: 4491: 4490: 4489: 4488: 4487: 4486: 4485: 4484: 4483: 4337: 4336: 4335: 4334: 4333: 4332: 4322:first language 4313: 4312: 4311: 4310: 4309: 4308: 4220: 4219: 4218: 4217: 4216: 4215: 4214: 4213: 4175: 4174: 4173: 4172: 4171: 4170: 4106: 4105: 4104: 4097: 4089:first language 4064: 4063: 4060: 4053: 4042: 4023: 4020: 4019: 4018: 4017: 4016: 4015: 4014: 4013: 4012: 4011: 4010: 3978: 3977: 3976: 3975: 3974: 3883: 3882: 3881: 3880: 3847: 3846: 3841: 3840: 3839: 3838: 3837: 3836: 3820:format, IINM) 3801: 3800: 3799: 3798: 3797: 3796: 3742: 3741: 3718: 3717: 3649: 3648: 3647: 3646: 3612: 3611: 3596: 3595: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3591: 3590: 3589: 3512: 3511: 3510: 3509: 3508: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3504: 3503: 3397: 3396: 3395: 3316: 3315: 3314: 3313: 3312: 3311: 3310: 3309: 3308: 3307: 3306: 3305: 3304: 3303: 3302: 3301: 3300: 3299: 3298: 3297: 3256: 3255: 3254: 3253: 3252: 3251: 3250: 3249: 3248: 3247: 3246: 3245: 3244: 3243: 3242: 3241: 3226: 3184: 3183: 3182: 3122: 3121: 3120: 3119: 3118: 3117: 3116: 3115: 3083: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3005: 3004: 3003: 3002: 3001: 3000: 2987: 2986: 2985: 2984: 2983: 2982: 2952: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2899: 2898: 2897: 2889:ruleslawyering 2884: 2883: 2821: 2820:Date reversion 2818: 2817: 2816: 2815: 2814: 2813: 2812: 2811: 2810: 2809: 2808: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2801: 2800: 2799: 2798: 2797: 2796: 2795: 2794: 2757: 2756: 2755: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2744: 2743: 2742: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2735: 2734: 2707:Finland Swedes 2669: 2668: 2667: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2661: 2660: 2659: 2658: 2657: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2651: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2645:Finland Swedes 2643:, please read 2641:first language 2616: 2615: 2614: 2613: 2612: 2611: 2610: 2609: 2608: 2607: 2606: 2605: 2604: 2603: 2602: 2601: 2600: 2599: 2598: 2597: 2596: 2595: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2541: 2540: 2539: 2538: 2537: 2536: 2535: 2534: 2533: 2532: 2531: 2530: 2529: 2528: 2457: 2456: 2455: 2454: 2453: 2452: 2451: 2450: 2449: 2448: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2393: 2392: 2391: 2390: 2389: 2388: 2302: 2301: 2300: 2270: 2269: 2268: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2235: 2234: 2233: 2232: 2231: 2230: 2229: 2228: 2227: 2226: 2225: 2224: 2198: 2197: 2196: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2189: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2135: 2134: 2133: 2132: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2127: 2126: 2109: 2108: 2107: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2070: 2069: 2048: 2047: 2046: 2045: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2039: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2004: 2003: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1992: 1991: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1955: 1954: 1953: 1952: 1951: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1813: 1812: 1811: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1801: 1800: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1773: 1769: 1758: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1707: 1706: 1705: 1704: 1703: 1689: 1688: 1687: 1684: 1680: 1677: 1670: 1663: 1659: 1638: 1637: 1636: 1635: 1634: 1633: 1632: 1631: 1630: 1629: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1612: 1609: 1606: 1603: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1563: 1562: 1561: 1558: 1550: 1547: 1523: 1519: 1512: 1509: 1505: 1493: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1474: 1470: 1462: 1459: 1456: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1424: 1421: 1418: 1415:Swedish people 1411: 1408: 1405: 1395: 1394: 1384: 1383: 1372: 1371: 1349: 1348: 1345: 1324: 1323: 1310: 1304:Kommunerna.net 1298: 1282: 1281: 1280: 1279: 1278: 1277: 1252:The year does 1247: 1246: 1245: 1244: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1207: 1206: 1174: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1083: 1080: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1053: 1052: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1046: 1045: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1005: 1004: 1003: 1002: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 995: 994: 993: 992: 991: 990: 989: 988: 987: 986: 985: 984: 983: 982: 981: 980: 957: 920: 919: 918: 917: 916: 915: 914: 913: 912: 911: 910: 909: 908: 907: 906: 905: 904: 903: 902: 901: 900: 899: 898: 897: 880: 877: 874: 852:dictionary.com 799: 798: 797: 796: 795: 794: 793: 792: 791: 790: 789: 788: 776: 775: 774: 765: 764: 758: 757: 746: 735: 723: 722: 705: 704: 703: 702: 701: 700: 699: 698: 697: 696: 681: 680: 679: 561: 560: 509: 508: 507: 506: 505: 504: 503: 502: 501: 500: 448: 447: 446: 445: 444: 443: 424: 423: 422: 421: 420: 419: 412: 398: 397: 396: 395: 388: 387: 386: 380: 379: 378: 340: 339: 338: 337: 332: 327: 321: 316: 311: 306: 301: 296: 291: 283: 282: 278: 277: 276: 275: 267: 266: 262: 261: 260: 259: 254: 249: 244: 239: 234: 226: 225: 221: 220: 219: 218: 213: 205: 204: 200: 199: 198: 197: 192: 184: 183: 179: 178: 177: 176: 171: 163: 162: 151: 150: 149: 148: 147: 146: 96: 93: 90: 89: 84: 79: 72: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5720: 5707: 5704: 5702: 5699: 5696: 5692: 5690: 5687: 5685: 5682: 5680: 5677: 5676: 5668: 5664: 5660: 5659: 5654: 5647: 5646: 5643: 5642: 5639: 5635: 5627: 5615: 5612: 5608: 5607: 5606: 5602: 5598: 5594: 5593: 5592: 5589: 5585: 5584: 5583: 5579: 5575: 5571: 5570: 5569: 5566: 5561: 5560: 5557: 5554: 5550: 5549: 5548: 5547: 5542: 5535: 5523: 5494: 5490: 5486: 5482: 5481: 5480: 5477: 5473: 5469: 5465: 5464: 5463: 5459: 5455: 5451: 5447: 5446: 5445: 5442: 5438: 5433: 5429: 5425: 5424: 5423: 5419: 5415: 5410: 5409: 5408: 5403: 5396: 5389: 5384: 5383: 5382: 5381: 5380: 5379: 5378: 5377: 5376: 5375: 5374: 5373: 5372: 5371: 5356: 5353: 5348: 5347: 5346: 5342: 5339: 5336: 5332: 5326: 5321: 5318: 5317: 5316: 5313: 5309: 5304: 5303: 5302: 5298: 5295: 5292: 5288: 5281: 5280: 5279: 5274: 5267: 5259: 5258: 5257: 5253: 5250: 5247: 5243: 5236: 5235: 5234: 5230: 5226: 5222: 5221: 5220: 5219: 5216: 5211: 5209: 5202: 5199: 5191: 5183: 5179: 5175: 5174:Pieter Kuiper 5171: 5170: 5168: 5164: 5160: 5156: 5152: 5147: 5143: 5139: 5135: 5134: 5133: 5130: 5125: 5124: 5119: 5115: 5114: 5113: 5112: 5108: 5104: 5103:Pieter Kuiper 5095: 5071: 5068: 5063: 5062: 5061: 5058: 5054: 5050: 5046: 5045: 5044: 5041: 5037: 5032: 5029: 5028: 5027: 5026: 5025: 5022: 5019: 5014: 5011: 5010: 5009: 5008: 5007: 5004: 5000: 4995: 4991: 4988: 4987: 4986: 4985: 4984: 4981: 4978: 4973: 4970: 4966: 4965: 4964: 4963: 4962: 4959: 4955: 4951: 4947: 4941: 4938: 4934: 4930: 4926: 4923: 4919: 4916: 4911: 4908: 4904: 4901: 4897: 4893: 4892: 4891: 4890: 4889: 4886: 4883: 4878: 4875: 4872: 4868: 4864: 4861: 4857: 4854: 4851: 4850: 4848: 4847: 4846: 4843: 4839: 4833: 4832: 4826: 4822: 4817: 4814: 4810: 4809: 4808: 4807: 4803: 4802: 4796: 4792: 4788: 4784: 4779: 4776: 4773: 4769: 4766: 4762: 4761: 4760: 4759: 4755: 4752: 4747: 4744: 4741: 4740: 4737: 4733: 4732: 4731: 4728: 4725: 4720: 4716: 4712: 4711: 4705: 4701: 4698: 4694: 4690: 4686: 4685: 4684: 4683: 4679: 4676: 4675: 4672: 4671: 4670: 4667: 4663: 4659: 4658: 4654: 4650: 4645: 4641: 4636: 4633: 4628: 4627: 4620: 4617: 4612: 4608: 4605: 4601: 4600: 4599: 4598: 4594: 4590: 4587: 4583: 4580: 4579:verifiability 4576: 4573: 4569: 4564: 4560: 4559: 4558: 4557: 4556: 4555: 4552: 4544: 4540: 4537: 4533: 4529: 4525: 4521: 4517: 4514: 4511: 4508: 4507: 4506: 4501:Reply to tags 4500: 4482: 4479: 4475: 4470: 4469: 4468: 4463: 4456: 4448: 4447: 4446: 4443: 4438: 4437: 4436: 4431: 4424: 4417: 4412: 4411: 4410: 4407: 4402: 4401: 4400: 4395: 4388: 4380: 4379: 4378: 4375: 4370: 4369: 4368: 4363: 4356: 4349: 4348: 4347: 4346: 4343: 4331: 4328: 4323: 4319: 4318: 4317: 4316: 4315: 4314: 4307: 4304: 4300: 4296: 4292: 4288: 4284: 4279: 4275: 4274: 4273: 4268: 4261: 4253: 4252: 4251: 4248: 4243: 4242: 4241: 4240: 4235: 4228: 4212: 4208: 4204: 4199: 4194: 4190: 4189: 4188: 4185: 4181: 4180: 4179: 4178: 4177: 4176: 4168: 4164: 4160: 4156: 4155: 4154: 4150: 4146: 4142: 4138: 4133: 4129: 4125: 4121: 4117: 4116: 4115: 4112: 4107: 4102: 4098: 4094: 4090: 4085: 4084: 4082: 4081: 4080: 4079: 4076: 4075: 4061: 4058: 4054: 4051: 4047: 4043: 4041: 4037: 4033: 4030:Dispute over 4029: 4028: 4027: 4022:Third opinion 4021: 4009: 4005: 4001: 3996: 3992: 3991: 3990: 3987: 3983: 3979: 3973: 3969: 3965: 3960: 3956: 3955: 3954: 3950: 3946: 3942: 3938: 3934: 3933: 3932: 3928: 3924: 3920: 3916: 3912: 3908: 3904: 3903: 3902: 3898: 3894: 3889: 3888: 3887: 3886: 3885: 3884: 3879: 3876: 3872: 3867: 3862: 3861: 3860: 3857: 3853: 3849: 3848: 3843: 3842: 3835: 3832: 3827: 3823: 3819: 3815: 3811: 3807: 3806: 3805: 3804: 3803: 3802: 3795: 3792: 3788: 3787: 3786: 3781: 3774: 3766: 3765: 3764: 3761: 3756: 3752: 3748: 3744: 3743: 3740: 3735: 3728: 3720: 3719: 3714: 3713: 3712: 3711: 3708: 3703: 3700: 3696: 3691: 3682: 3680: 3676: 3671: 3667: 3664: 3662: 3661:autoformatted 3659:(my bolding) 3658: 3652: 3645: 3641: 3638: 3635: 3631: 3624: 3623: 3622: 3619: 3614: 3613: 3608: 3607: 3606: 3605: 3602: 3588: 3585: 3580: 3579: 3578: 3575: 3570: 3569: 3568: 3565: 3560: 3559: 3558: 3555: 3551: 3547: 3543: 3542: 3541: 3540: 3535: 3528: 3521: 3517: 3502: 3499: 3494: 3490: 3486: 3482: 3478: 3477: 3476: 3471: 3464: 3457: 3452: 3451: 3450: 3447: 3443: 3438: 3437: 3436: 3431: 3424: 3417: 3413: 3412: 3411: 3407: 3403: 3398: 3394: 3389: 3382: 3374: 3373: 3372: 3368: 3365: 3362: 3358: 3351: 3350: 3349: 3348: 3343: 3336: 3328: 3323: 3321: 3296: 3292: 3288: 3284: 3283: 3282: 3279: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3271: 3270: 3269: 3268: 3267: 3266: 3265: 3264: 3263: 3262: 3261: 3260: 3259: 3258: 3257: 3240: 3236: 3232: 3227: 3225: 3221: 3217: 3213: 3209: 3208: 3207: 3204: 3200: 3199: 3198: 3194: 3190: 3185: 3181: 3177: 3174: 3171: 3167: 3160: 3159: 3158: 3157: 3156: 3153: 3149: 3145: 3144: 3143: 3139: 3135: 3130: 3129: 3128: 3127: 3126: 3125: 3124: 3123: 3114: 3112: 3107: 3106: 3105: 3101: 3098: 3095: 3091: 3084: 3076: 3072: 3068: 3064: 3060: 3056: 3055: 3054: 3051: 3047: 3042: 3041: 3040: 3036: 3033: 3030: 3026: 3020: 3019: 3018: 3015: 3011: 3010: 3009: 3008: 3007: 3006: 2998: 2993: 2992: 2991: 2990: 2989: 2988: 2979: 2978: 2977: 2973: 2970: 2967: 2963: 2956: 2955: 2954: 2953: 2948: 2944: 2941: 2938: 2934: 2928: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2921: 2914: 2913: 2912: 2909: 2905: 2900: 2896: 2893: 2892: 2890: 2886: 2885: 2881: 2877: 2873: 2869: 2865: 2864: 2863: 2862: 2858: 2855: 2852: 2848: 2841: 2836: 2832: 2827: 2819: 2793: 2789: 2785: 2781: 2780: 2779: 2778: 2777: 2776: 2775: 2774: 2773: 2772: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2768: 2767: 2766: 2765: 2764: 2763: 2762: 2761: 2760: 2759: 2758: 2733: 2729: 2725: 2721: 2717: 2712: 2708: 2704: 2703: 2702: 2699: 2695: 2691: 2690: 2689: 2688: 2687: 2686: 2685: 2684: 2683: 2682: 2681: 2680: 2679: 2678: 2677: 2676: 2675: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2671: 2670: 2646: 2642: 2638: 2637: 2636: 2635: 2634: 2633: 2632: 2631: 2630: 2629: 2628: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2622: 2621: 2620: 2619: 2618: 2617: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2586: 2582: 2578: 2575:reference is 2573: 2572: 2571: 2568: 2563: 2562: 2561: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2556: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2549: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2527:demographics. 2525: 2524: 2523: 2519: 2515: 2510: 2509: 2508: 2505: 2500: 2499: 2498: 2494: 2490: 2486: 2481: 2477: 2476: 2475: 2472: 2467: 2466: 2465: 2464: 2463: 2462: 2461: 2460: 2459: 2458: 2446: 2445: 2444: 2440: 2436: 2432: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2422: 2418: 2417: 2416: 2412: 2408: 2404: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2387: 2384: 2379: 2378: 2376: 2372: 2369: 2366: 2362: 2355: 2354: 2353: 2350: 2346: 2341: 2340: 2339: 2336: 2332: 2328: 2324: 2320: 2316: 2312: 2311: 2310: 2307: 2303: 2299: 2296: 2295: 2293: 2292: 2291: 2290: 2287: 2283: 2279: 2275: 2264: 2261: 2257: 2256: 2255: 2251: 2247: 2243: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2223: 2219: 2215: 2210: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2203: 2202: 2201: 2200: 2199: 2188: 2185: 2181: 2177: 2173: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2169: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2155: 2151: 2147: 2143: 2142: 2141: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2137: 2136: 2125: 2122: 2118: 2114: 2110: 2106: 2104: 2101: 2100: 2098: 2094: 2092: 2089: 2088: 2086: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2078: 2077: 2068: 2064: 2060: 2056: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2050: 2049: 2032: 2029: 2025: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2017: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2013: 2012: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2008: 2007: 2006: 2005: 1990: 1986: 1982: 1979:via Amazon. – 1978: 1973: 1972: 1971: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1963: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1947: 1944: 1940: 1939: 1938: 1937: 1936: 1935: 1934: 1933: 1932: 1931: 1930: 1929: 1918: 1914: 1910: 1906: 1902: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1889: 1880: 1876: 1872: 1869: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1842: 1838: 1834: 1829: 1828: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1816: 1815: 1814: 1799: 1796: 1792: 1788: 1784: 1779: 1774: 1770: 1767: 1763: 1759: 1755: 1754: 1752: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1742: 1738: 1734: 1730: 1726: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1721: 1720: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1702: 1698: 1694: 1690: 1685: 1681: 1678: 1675: 1671: 1668: 1664: 1660: 1657: 1652: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1648: 1647: 1646: 1645: 1644: 1643: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1628: 1625: 1622: 1617: 1613: 1610: 1607: 1604: 1601: 1596: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1590: 1589: 1588: 1587: 1586: 1585: 1576: 1572: 1568: 1564: 1559: 1556: 1551: 1548: 1545: 1541: 1537: 1533: 1529: 1524: 1520: 1517: 1513: 1510: 1506: 1503: 1502: 1501: 1500: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1487: 1484: 1481: 1475: 1473:questionable. 1471: 1468: 1463: 1460: 1457: 1454: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1442: 1438: 1434: 1430: 1425: 1422: 1419: 1416: 1412: 1409: 1406: 1402: 1401: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1396: 1393: 1390: 1386: 1385: 1382: 1379: 1374: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1358: 1354: 1346: 1343: 1342: 1341: 1338: 1337: 1333: 1329: 1321: 1317: 1316: 1311: 1309: 1305: 1299: 1296: 1295: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1276: 1273: 1269: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1259: 1255: 1251: 1250: 1249: 1248: 1242: 1237: 1233: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1219: 1218: 1217: 1214: 1209: 1208: 1203: 1202: 1201: 1200: 1197: 1192: 1188: 1184: 1180: 1172: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1145: 1141: 1140: 1139: 1136: 1132: 1128: 1125:There's also 1124: 1123: 1122: 1117: 1110: 1103: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1097: 1094: 1090: 1081: 1079: 1078: 1074: 1070: 1039: 1036: 1031: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1006: 978: 973: 972: 971: 967: 963: 958: 956: 952: 948: 944: 943: 942: 941: 940: 939: 938: 937: 936: 935: 934: 933: 932: 931: 930: 929: 928: 927: 926: 925: 924: 923: 922: 921: 895: 894: 893: 889: 885: 881: 878: 875: 872: 871: 870: 867: 862: 861: 860: 857: 853: 849: 848: 847: 846: 845: 842: 837: 833: 829: 825: 824: 823: 820: 816: 811: 810: 809: 808: 807: 806: 805: 804: 803: 802: 801: 800: 785: 784: 783: 780: 777: 771: 767: 766: 763: 760: 759: 755: 751: 747: 744: 740: 736: 733: 729: 725: 724: 721: 718: 717: 715: 714: 713: 712: 711: 710: 709: 708: 707: 706: 694: 690: 686: 682: 677: 673: 669: 665: 661: 657: 653: 649: 645: 641: 637: 633: 632: 630: 629: 628: 625: 621: 617: 613: 612: 611: 608: 604: 603:Peter Isotalo 600: 596: 592: 591: 590: 587: 583: 582: 581: 578: 573: 572: 571: 570: 567: 558: 554: 550: 546: 542: 538: 534: 530: 526: 522: 518: 514: 513: 512: 499: 496: 492: 488: 484: 483: 482: 479: 475: 471: 467: 463: 462: 461: 458: 454: 453: 452: 451: 450: 449: 441: 437: 433: 430: 429: 428: 427: 426: 425: 417: 413: 410: 409: 408: 405: 402: 401: 400: 399: 393: 389: 384: 383: 381: 376: 375: 372: 371: 370: 367: 363: 359: 358: 357: 356: 353: 349: 345: 336: 333: 331: 328: 325: 322: 320: 317: 315: 312: 310: 307: 305: 302: 300: 297: 295: 292: 290: 287: 286: 285: 284: 280: 279: 274: 271: 270: 269: 268: 264: 263: 258: 255: 253: 250: 248: 245: 243: 240: 238: 235: 233: 230: 229: 228: 227: 223: 222: 217: 214: 212: 209: 208: 207: 206: 202: 201: 196: 193: 191: 188: 187: 186: 185: 181: 180: 175: 172: 170: 167: 166: 165: 164: 160: 159: 158: 156: 145: 142: 138: 137: 136: 133: 129: 125: 124: 123: 120: 116: 115: 114: 113: 110: 106: 102: 94: 88: 85: 83: 80: 77: 73: 71: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 5694: 5662: 5656: 5631: 5519: 5467: 5449: 5436: 5427: 5387: 5337: 5324: 5319: 5293: 5248: 5207: 5203: 5197: 5195: 5172:Excellent! / 5145: 5099: 5052: 5048: 4936: 4906: 4899: 4876: 4870: 4859: 4820: 4794: 4790: 4786: 4782: 4777: 4764: 4714: 4703: 4696: 4692: 4688: 4680:"Vocabulary" 4610: 4566: 4548: 4542: 4535: 4531: 4527: 4523: 4519: 4504: 4338: 4221: 4166: 4101:Barfortabarn 4100: 4068: 4065: 4025: 3958: 3940: 3936: 3918: 3910: 3906: 3870: 3865: 3851: 3825: 3821: 3817: 3813: 3809: 3754: 3750: 3704: 3698: 3694: 3692: 3683: 3678: 3674: 3672: 3668: 3665: 3660: 3656: 3653: 3650: 3636: 3597: 3549: 3519: 3515: 3513: 3442:my talk page 3415: 3363: 3324: 3317: 3172: 3147: 3108: 3096: 3031: 2996: 2968: 2939: 2903: 2894: 2867: 2853: 2829: 2828:states that 2823: 2693: 2484: 2367: 2317:..." or "In 2297: 2271: 2179: 2175: 2112: 2102: 2090: 1904: 1900: 1867: 1790: 1778:point-making 1765: 1761: 1750: 1666: 1615: 1599: 1367: 1350: 1347:19. Bolander 1339: 1325: 1314: 1301:(in Swedish) 1292: 1290:(in Swedish) 1283: 1253: 1241:Scat singing 1236:Scat singing 1232:Scat singing 1191:Scat singing 1176: 1154:194.252.5.66 1085: 1066: 884:Robert Greer 835: 831: 761: 753: 749: 742: 738: 732:contractions 719: 688: 684: 676:televisionen 675: 671: 667: 666:= "the 53", 663: 659: 655: 651: 647: 643: 639: 636:10:50 kronor 635: 562: 557:televisionen 556: 552: 548: 547:= "the 53", 544: 540: 536: 532: 528: 524: 520: 517:10:50 kronor 516: 510: 490: 486: 473: 469: 465: 439: 435: 432:1:a (första) 431: 391: 343: 341: 334: 329: 323: 318: 313: 308: 303: 298: 293: 288: 272: 256: 252:1:a (första) 251: 246: 241: 236: 231: 215: 210: 194: 189: 173: 168: 154: 152: 98: 75: 43: 37: 5655:This is an 5155:Robertgreer 5149:—Preceding 5121:comprehend. 4933:red herring 4877:Barfotabarn 4756:Vocabulary: 3998:know more. 3871:consistency 3747:November 27 3479:There is a 3456:high ground 3111:27 November 3046:27 November 2694:Barfotabarn 2323:November 28 1772:dictionary. 1733:WP:OVERLINK 1205:readership. 1148:—Preceding 828:contraction 817:for that. 650:= "first", 531:= "first", 436:S:t (Sankt) 257:S:t (Sankt) 36:This is an 5225:Lightmouse 4595:Vocabulary 4592:statement. 4000:Lightmouse 3651:Hey, all! 3327:a template 2722:(again). – 2577:WP:CRYSTAL 2331:2007-11-28 1297:2005-05-03 745:(correct). 668:första a:t 664:femtitrean 549:första a:t 545:femtitrean 487:4:e gången 470:4:e gången 5706:Archive 6 5701:Archive 5 5695:Archive 4 5689:Archive 3 5684:Archive 2 5679:Archive 1 5432:consensus 5388:guideline 5138:Norwegian 4697:noun + -a 4644:ownership 4632:off topic 4586:WP:WEASEL 4161:and then 4143:above. – 3993:I have a 3911:right now 3907:right now 3546:consensus 3516:guideline 3212:owernship 3148:improving 3134:Gatoclass 3057:Per both 1667:beginning 1532:APA Style 1320:US Census 1285:article: 1133:article. 815:wikibooks 87:Archive 6 82:Archive 5 76:Archive 4 70:Archive 3 65:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 5522:bug 4582 5163:contribs 5151:unsigned 4835:instead? 4622:written. 4545:article. 4295:WP:DATED 3959:normally 3937:normally 3852:normally 3697:linking 3657:normally 3489:WP:WIAFA 3231:JHunterJ 3189:JHunterJ 3067:JHunterJ 2916:editors. 2878:or that 2485:one time 2431:WP:WIAFA 2315:November 1907:forms. – 1674:ISO 8601 1404:section. 1150:unsigned 730:and for 728:genitive 324:IOGT:are 5658:archive 5118:tweaked 4898:states 4416:WP:CRAP 4299:WP:ASOF 4128:WP:ASOF 4073:Annyong 3964:Tkynerd 3923:Tkynerd 3875:Tkynerd 3831:Tkynerd 3760:Tkynerd 3675:Linking 3601:Tkynerd 2720:WP:DATE 2176:neutrum 1555:WP:CITE 1544:WP:CITE 1093:Danilot 962:Tkynerd 836:Ax:sson 739:Peter:s 39:archive 5533:henrik 5468:you're 5450:really 5437:really 5394:henrik 5330:Lurker 5286:Lurker 5265:henrik 5241:Lurker 5214:(talk) 5142:Danish 4954:WP:FAR 4474:WP:FAR 4454:henrik 4422:henrik 4386:henrik 4354:henrik 4287:WP:MOS 4259:henrik 4226:henrik 4141:thread 3995:script 3945:LarRan 3893:LarRan 3856:LarRan 3772:henrik 3755:should 3726:henrik 3707:LarRan 3629:Lurker 3526:henrik 3493:WP:MOS 3462:henrik 3422:henrik 3380:henrik 3356:Lurker 3334:henrik 3165:Lurker 3089:Lurker 3024:Lurker 2961:Lurker 2932:Lurker 2846:Lurker 2840:WP:IAR 2835:ignore 2716:WP:3RR 2360:Lurker 2117:supine 2113:Spelat 1683:2004.) 1616:amount 1258:–panda 1196:–panda 1135:–panda 1108:henrik 1102:Swedex 866:–panda 841:–panda 779:–panda 743:Peters 685:Ax:son 648:första 607:–panda 566:–panda 529:första 491:förf:s 478:–panda 466:Ax:son 404:–panda 392:förf:s 352:–panda 5638:Peter 5611:Peter 5597:panda 5588:Peter 5574:panda 5565:Peter 5553:Peter 5485:panda 5476:Peter 5472:towel 5454:panda 5441:Peter 5414:panda 5352:Peter 5312:Peter 5129:Peter 5067:panda 5057:Peter 5040:panda 5021:Peter 5003:panda 4994:WP:OR 4980:Peter 4958:panda 4943:text. 4922:WP:OR 4915:WP:OR 4896:WP:EQ 4885:Peter 4842:panda 4825:WP:OR 4772:WP:OR 4735:give. 4727:Peter 4666:panda 4616:WP:OR 4551:Peter 4478:panda 4442:panda 4406:panda 4374:panda 4342:panda 4327:panda 4303:panda 4278:As of 4247:panda 4203:panda 4184:Peter 4157:Read 4145:panda 4132:WP:OR 4111:Peter 4096:else. 4070:Hello 3986:Peter 3791:Peter 3751:could 3618:Peter 3584:Peter 3574:panda 3564:Peter 3554:panda 3498:panda 3485:WP:FA 3446:panda 3416:their 3402:panda 3287:panda 3278:Peter 3216:panda 3203:Peter 3152:Peter 3050:Peter 3014:Peter 2908:Peter 2831:users 2784:panda 2724:panda 2711:WP:OR 2698:Peter 2581:panda 2567:Peter 2514:panda 2504:Peter 2489:panda 2471:Peter 2435:panda 2421:Peter 2407:panda 2383:Peter 2349:Peter 2306:Peter 2260:Peter 2246:panda 2242:kwami 2214:panda 2184:Peter 2180:utrum 2146:panda 2121:Peter 2059:panda 2028:Peter 1981:panda 1943:Peter 1909:panda 1871:kwami 1833:panda 1795:Peter 1737:panda 1693:panda 1624:Peter 1602:here. 1567:panda 1538:, or 1522:same. 1483:Peter 1433:panda 1389:Peter 1378:Peter 1353:panda 1328:panda 1272:Peter 1213:Peter 1127:TISUS 1035:Peter 856:Peter 819:Peter 660:53:an 656:Sankt 624:Peter 577:Peter 541:53:an 537:Sankt 474:54:an 366:Peter 141:Peter 119:Peter 95:Colon 16:< 5601:talk 5578:talk 5540:talk 5489:talk 5458:talk 5418:talk 5401:talk 5341:done 5335:said 5297:done 5291:said 5272:talk 5252:done 5246:said 5229:talk 5208:Tony 5178:talk 5159:talk 5107:talk 5051:and 5049:bila 4950:WP:V 4937:this 4871:have 4653:WP:V 4572:WP:V 4563:WP:V 4543:this 4461:talk 4429:talk 4393:talk 4361:talk 4293:and 4266:talk 4233:talk 4207:talk 4163:this 4159:this 4149:talk 4126:and 4093:this 4048:and 4040:2006 4036:2004 4004:talk 3968:talk 3949:talk 3927:talk 3915:here 3897:talk 3779:talk 3733:talk 3640:done 3634:said 3610:law. 3533:talk 3469:talk 3444:? – 3429:talk 3406:talk 3387:talk 3367:done 3361:said 3341:talk 3291:talk 3235:talk 3220:talk 3193:talk 3176:done 3170:said 3138:talk 3100:done 3094:said 3071:talk 3061:and 3035:done 3029:said 2981:Yes. 2972:done 2966:said 2943:done 2937:said 2857:done 2851:said 2824:The 2788:talk 2728:talk 2585:talk 2518:talk 2493:talk 2439:talk 2411:talk 2371:done 2365:said 2327:2007 2319:2007 2276:and 2250:talk 2218:talk 2150:talk 2063:talk 2024:this 1985:talk 1913:talk 1903:and 1875:talk 1837:talk 1787:WP:V 1741:talk 1731:and 1697:talk 1656:WP:V 1571:talk 1437:talk 1357:talk 1332:talk 1158:talk 1115:talk 1073:talk 977:beer 966:talk 951:talk 888:talk 834:and 672:tv:n 553:tv:n 493:. -- 472:and 434:and 5636:. 5428:lot 5198:not 5053:öla 4956:. – 4907:not 4821:not 4783:may 4715:all 4611:not 4565:: " 4530:or 4528:stå 4198:pdf 4050:con 4046:pro 4038:vs 3941:all 3753:or 3699:all 3695:for 3550:not 2997:you 2904:not 2347:. 2244:. – 1977:TOC 1791:you 1766:the 1729:MOS 1254:not 832:S:t 750:not 689:1:a 652:S:t 644:1:a 597:or 533:S:t 525:1:a 489:to 476:)? 5603:) 5580:) 5529:. 5491:) 5470:a 5460:) 5420:) 5343:) 5299:) 5254:) 5231:) 5180:) 5165:) 5161:• 5116:I 5109:) 4860:-a 4791:is 4693:-s 4689:-a 4536:-a 4532:dö 4526:, 4524:gå 4520:-a 4209:) 4151:) 4006:) 3984:. 3970:) 3951:) 3929:) 3899:) 3829:-- 3642:) 3408:) 3369:) 3293:) 3237:) 3222:) 3195:) 3178:) 3140:) 3102:) 3073:) 3037:) 2974:) 2945:) 2929:. 2859:) 2790:) 2730:) 2587:) 2520:) 2495:) 2441:) 2413:) 2377:' 2373:) 2325:, 2252:) 2220:) 2152:) 2065:) 1987:) 1915:) 1877:) 1839:) 1743:) 1699:) 1573:) 1557:.) 1534:, 1530:, 1439:) 1368:DI 1359:) 1334:) 1160:) 1075:) 968:) 960:-- 953:) 890:) 674:= 662:= 654:= 646:= 638:= 555:= 543:= 535:= 527:= 519:= 5669:. 5599:( 5576:( 5537:• 5487:( 5456:( 5416:( 5412:– 5398:• 5338:· 5333:( 5294:· 5289:( 5269:• 5249:· 5244:( 5227:( 5176:( 5157:( 5105:( 5065:– 5038:– 5001:– 4917:. 4840:– 4655:. 4606:. 4574:. 4458:• 4426:• 4390:• 4358:• 4340:– 4325:– 4263:• 4230:• 4205:( 4147:( 4052:) 4002:( 3966:( 3947:( 3925:( 3895:( 3776:• 3730:• 3637:· 3632:( 3572:– 3530:• 3496:– 3466:• 3426:• 3404:( 3384:• 3364:· 3359:( 3338:• 3289:( 3233:( 3218:( 3191:( 3173:· 3168:( 3136:( 3097:· 3092:( 3069:( 3032:· 3027:( 2969:· 2964:( 2940:· 2935:( 2854:· 2849:( 2786:( 2726:( 2583:( 2516:( 2491:( 2437:( 2409:( 2368:· 2363:( 2248:( 2216:( 2148:( 2061:( 1983:( 1911:( 1905:t 1901:n 1873:( 1835:( 1780:. 1739:( 1695:( 1691:– 1658:. 1569:( 1565:– 1546:. 1518:. 1469:. 1435:( 1431:– 1355:( 1351:– 1330:( 1322:) 1306:* 1156:( 1112:• 1071:( 964:( 949:( 886:( 418:. 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index