Talk:Fjordman

message: His oft-repeated reference to a Muslim rape wave in Sweden was in fact a spike in reported rapes from 2004-2005 caused by a widening of the legal definition of rape.The muslims are raping our women!!!
Sentence deleted with the explanation that, I deleted a so-called 'refutation' of one of Fjordman's positions which was clearly biased and offered a link to youtube as its source. How was this biased? Do you have sources claiming otherwise? Are youtube videos not allowed to use as reference?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guftafs (talk • contribs) 14:17, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted Item re Muslim Rape Wave in Sweden 

message: This edit states as edit summary that "we already knew" that "anti-Muslim" violates NPOV. I don't see how. Am I being dense? To me it seems clearer and equivalent in meaning. Can anyone cite the relevant policy and/or explain? If not, I'm inclined to revert for clarity. "Critical of Islam" was already used in the lead. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:25, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can't figure out why "anti-Muslim" is not neutral language or factually correct, maybe you should stop coming here. Dubyaninja (talk) 07:13, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ownership much? I compromised by putting it back only in the sentence referring to how he is cited. In those sources his stance on Moslem immigration is referenced, not on whether people should convert from Islam. So while accommodating your concern that there is an important difference, I have used the term that better fits that context. I would better understand your problem with "anti-Muslim" if you spelled it out. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "anti-Muslim" vs. "critical of Islam"

message: When we know next to nothing about the personal details of the life of Fjordman, how can we know whether or not he is dead or alive?VR talk 04:53, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: We can't, so it's wise to assume he is until we learn otherwise from a reliable source.Yngvadottir (talk) 16:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: He is still with us, as you can see in this recent blog wars with Fjordman at the epicentre. —189.136.167.141 (talk) 06:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Alive

message: Multiple sources are now saying Fjordman is in fact Anders Behring Breivik, the perpetrator of the 2011 Oslo attacks. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:57, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This seems to be total misinformation. I am striking out my comment. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 02:48, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

text: He has given his account to another person as long as he is in prison. --82.113.99.150 (talk) 06:46, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It is very clear that he is not and never was Fjordman.  If you look at  his contributions to document.no, you'll see him having debates with Fjordman.  See for example the posting at 2009-12-03 01:21:04 where he responds to Fjordman or the one at 2009-12-02 00:56:39 where he says he wasn't familiar with Fjordman's work until 2008. -- 144.32.126.12 (talk) 13:38, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Breivik indicates that he is a big fan of Fjordman, see his manifesto , that is notable enough to include if some blogger who isn't that wide read like Fjordman deserves a Wikipedia article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.133.21 (talk) 15:24, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately Fjordman is being thrown under a bus by the Blogosphere.  If a criminal takes quotes and builds a manifesto. it does not mean the author supports the actions of a psychotic. I have placed a link to his denial on the site. I expect it to be removed. I have noticed tha Fjordman has disabled comments on that site, I wonder if the guy is being harassed.  --Searchengineman (talk) 05:04, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: What makes a comment posted under the name "Baron Bodissey" in the blog "Gates of Vienna" a citeable source for anything related to "Fjordman"? How is it encyclopaedically valid to write sentences like "it may be falsely reported that..." ? -- Seelefant (talk) 06:26, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

text: Classic Original Research, but I suspect you've been looking at the sections that were lifted from Fjordman. I easily found usage errors in a brief look at the section on Catholicism vs. Protestantism; Fjordman's English is much better. Also look above; there are several examples of them engaging each other in online forums. In any case, it's not up to you or me as encyclopedia editors to determine this very serious matter; and all reliable sources are saying it was only a rumour and is now discredited. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:13, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anders Behring Breivik? 

message: This section should be removed. It is clearly WP:COATRACK. If it belongs anywhere, it belongs in the Breivik article, but not here. The fact that Fjordman quotes someone else's writing is not sufficiently relevant to the Fjordman article to drag in the author, along with a denial, etc. I haven't removed it yet, but I came close. I'll give others a chance to comment first.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I removed it on those grounds when it was first introduced. All the more so since the sources - including the Dutch one - are all saying the idea that Fjordman is Breivik was a rumour that has since been discredited. (I don't think it merits inclusion in the article on Breivik, but I'll leave that for those working on that one.) There are at least 2 reliable sources for Breivik having called Fjordman a major influence, so I think it should be mentioned, particularly since one, in Aftenposten, is all about Fjordman, but it's out of all proportion to have a section on that. It's part of the section on his influence. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:57, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

text: I've now removed it and the discredited rumor again, but added the Aftenposten source and another Norwegian newspaper source. Those can be used to support the statement that the rumor is discredited, if it is decided that that should be here, but I don't think it should, for BLP reasons. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:23, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Moving it to the blog part of the article is a significant improvement. I have reworded it because I think it's awkward. I still think it's awkward, frankly. I've also replaced "self-admitted perpetrator" with "accused". Breivik's confession doesn't need to be part of this article, and a confession, in and of itself, does not mean he is guilty. He has not been convicted yet, and we shouldn't drag in his many controversial problems into this article.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:40, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I read this discussion after my brief entry in the article. maybe i missed something. also, there are suspicions that fjordman actually is breivik. if fjordman stops posting from now on, this is an indication, but of course no proof. Maximilian (talk) 13:45, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  2011 Norway attacks 

message: "He distinguishes his views from Nazism:
The Nazis believed that whites, and blondes in particular, had the right to colonize and eradicate others. But the policy we follow today could be described as reversed Nazism, since it is based on the assumption that whites should have fewer rights than others and can be colonized and ethnically cleansed with impunity.[23]"
The introduction "He distinguishes his views from Nazism:" is faulty. If you read the quote carefully you will find that he is much closer to describing his own views as very similar to Nazism. He is criticizing the opposite view, the anti-Nazi, multicultural, tolerant western countries current position. 
I will not change this myself, because there are obviously other editors working on this article, which has become interesting because the perpetrator of the recent Oslo killings has referred to this person. Another reason is that English is not my first language. 
But I can suggest other introductions which would be more appropriate: He distinguishes his views from anti-Nazism. He distinguishes his views from anti-Nazi, multicultural, tolerant western countries current position. He describes his views as very close to Nazism. for example. The word "we" in the second sentence of the quote does not refer to Fjordman and his friends, it refers to the position of western governments and people in the multicultural, tolerant western world. 
These words in the introduction of the next quote are probably faulty too. "He rejects accusations of racism:"
The following quote does not support this conclusion/introduction by the editor who wrote it.
"The translator used for the radical Swedish left-wing website "Expo" material is a poster calling himself Truumax, who seems to think that the Sweden Democrats are a racist party. I asked Truumax whether it should be considered “racism” if native Swedes resist being turned into a minority in their own country, which they will become within a few decades if current levels of immigration continue.[27]"
This quote is formulated as a question so you can not say that the author calls himself a racist or not. But it is obvious that he want native Swedes to resist "being turned into a minority in their own country, which they will become within a few decades if current levels of immigration continue." Then he asks if that view can be called "racist" or not.
Breivik was playing with words in a similar way yesterday at the preliminary court hearings when he admitted that he placed the bomb outside the Norwegian government house and he admitted that he shot all of those teenagers on the island, but he did not admit that he was guilty of a crime. He does not want to be called a criminal, because in his own view he is a hero. Similarly Fjordman might not want to be called a racist, but this quote does not say that he denies being a racist. Roger491127 (talk) 00:35, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Faulty introduction to quote

message: I have brought the issues that are being discussed here to the attention of the Biographies of living persons (BLP) noticeboard. See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Fjordman (2).  Cs32en Talk to me  14:04, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  BLP noticeboard 

message: I added an intresting slant on his relationship with the Finnish MP Jussi Halla-aho.213.81.116.126 (talk) 09:46, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The source you added says that Fjordman cited Hallo-aho, and thus isn't useful in this article. It could, however, be a problem with the translation? Yngvadottir (talk) 04:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Jussi Halla-aho

message: The article claims that "He also wrote for the Norwegian site Document.no until 2009". However, the reference doesn't contain that information. To my knowledge, Fjordman only commented on articles written by document.no, just like hundreds of other people have. If so, he didn't write 'for' document.no any more than people who provide short opinion remarks in newspapers write 'for' the newspapers. Unless evidence can be given that Fjordman actually wrote _for_ document.no, I suggest a rewording.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.80.144 (talk) 04:17, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks; we'll check the sources. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

text: Following up here: in the reference, the moderator(s) of the site do(es) say that he was permitted to write for the site. But it doesn't say 2009. I'll look further regarding the date. --Yngvadottir (talk) 13:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Bellatores has removed it, so I removed it in the version I'm reworking, also. Yngvadottir (talk) 07:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Fjordman and document.no

message: Wikipedia can not know if ‘fjordman’ is a real person, identity oder hundreds oder two .... We can only know, that there are informations signed with ‘fjordman’. Zabia2 (talk) 11:26, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, but I've only noted one reliable source saying that he may be more than one person, and multiple reliable sources do refer to him as one person. Can you cite a few reliable sources that raise the issue? --Yngvadottir (talk) 13:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know if this is the one reliable source you're talking about, but it mentions it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2011/jul/24/norway-anders-behring-breivik-beliefs : "Fjordman, who may be several people writing under a pseudonym, is at least one Norwegian Islamophobe who has for years been predicting civil war between Muslims and their neighbours." 126.59.94.137 (talk) 05:03, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that was the one I had seen.Yngvadottir (talk) 07:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

text: "Fjordman" has been identified by Norwegian police, according to several news sources in Norway. The police has confirmed they are going to question him. Imo there is quite a chance that Norwegian media will get hold of this information, and publish his identity. Charlie 06:46, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The source you added doesn't say that; concluding from their stated intent that they have identified him is speculation. Unless you have sources that actually say the police know his identity, adding this is premature. Yngvadottir (talk) 07:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Confirmed by the police today. Added reference. Charlie 14:25, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Yngvadottir: Please refrain from repeatedly reverting edits you find unpleasant/incriminating(?) I much prefer we discuss matters on the talk page first. Mr Jensen/Fjordman has, justly or unjustly, become what the police call a "key figure" in their investigation, and I think holding this information back is blatantly biased.  Charlie 08:22, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: New section made below. --Yngvadottir (talk) 12:12, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

text: 
Fjordman came out in the Norwegian daily VG today. I have written two referenced sentences in the article to this fact, but I guess it opens a lot of other questions, for instance: Should the article be re-titled to Peder Nøstevold Jensen? --benjamil (talk) 07:05, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Re-title and redirect "Fjordman" to the new article. Mr Jensen is now a public person, and an important figure in understanding the background for the 2011 Norway attacks. See also the discussion about the  deletion requests for the Fjordman article (now closed). Charlie 08:22, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Wait for now. If the Fjordman blog is the only thing that Jensen is notable for, then the article's title would probably be kept, per WP:BLP1E.  Cs32en Talk to me  09:14, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Identification 

message: Reproducng here the following message from Charlie, which he posted above and also to my talk:
:Please refrain from repeatedly removing quotes and information you simply do not like. I much prefer we discuss matters on the talk pages first. Charlie 08:27, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not what I'm doing. If you had looked, you would have seen that the info about his being called an extremist was already included, with that ref, in a better place. Also there are BLP concerns: Collect removed the entire paragraph, short though it was. I've been trying to get her to engage on the talk page so that other editors can see the range of viewpoints among editors. I am sorry that my editing of your contribution to remove repetition and tidy up citation struck you as biased removal.  --Yngvadottir (talk) 12:12, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: WP:BLP is very clear.   Collect (talk) 12:35, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've read it multiple times and still do not see how it can be used to justify totally removing information which is not contentious—the fact that Breivik extensively cited his writings, and now the fact that he has been questioned by the police and the fact that he has revealed his name to the press—and is adequately referenced. Negative information with poor sourcing, such as any implication that he endorsed Breivik's action that might arise from reporting speculation (the rapidly discredited rumor that Breivik is Fjordman being a good example, and I also include under this heading undue weight on how much Breivik admired his writings (others did too) or on what the police may seek to learn from questioning him, or the loaded word "interrogate") should not be included without extremely good sources, which is why I have sought to minimize the paragraph on Breivik, not offset it as a special use of his works by, for example, making a subheading, and state only facts that are reported by multiple reliable sources and are not disputed (contentious). Please tell me where I am misinterpreting policy in the above. The policy most definitely does not say "Never say anything that could be construed as negative." What I have been trying to do is keep the article factual, NPOV, and respectful of BLP concerns while compromising with sources and wording that other editors have used. And avoiding having the article become a series of "X said" . . . "Y said". Yngvadottir (talk) 15:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your reply. My remark was in reference to the police investigation of the 2011 attacks, not the accusations of extremism/dystopianism. I should perhaps have stated that more clearly. Charlie 13:14, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. See above response to Collect for some of my concerns. I have tried very hard to produce compromises that move editing forward, rather than simply reverting. There has rarely been a consensus about this article. I do disagree with you about the wording of the sentence about the police inquiry, but I see above that events have unfolded in a manner that changes the legal implications. I still regard it as extremely important not to suggest by emphasis or wording that Fjordman is guilty by association—a specific issue that Collect has raised. (I also think that for both accuracy and clarity's sake we need to give the authors and titles of all cited articles, and indicate their language, no matter how rapidly things happen. Several of us here can evidently read Norwegian and German as well as English, and some of us can also read Swedish, but people consulting the article shouldn't have to click on a reference link to discover they can't read it). Yngvadottir (talk) 15:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Just to clarify Mr Jensen's current status in the investigation: initially he was just a witness. According to himself, the police decided to confiscate a possession of his shortly after he was questioned (a PC). This is a legal step which automatically gives him status as charged according to the Norwegian criminal case procedure act (section 82). No formal, written charge has been presented yet. Charlie 14:22, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: BLP concerns

message: Go to Blogging in Iran (current version), look up the "academic papers" section and sure enough, "A Case Study of Iranian English Language Weblogs, inside and outside of the Islamic Republic of Iran." by none other than Fjordman shows up, writing under his real identity this time.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.231.92.195 (talk) 12:55, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It is now removed as an "extremist source". But the paper was accepted by the university as a masters paper. So it must not have been with extremist content. If something is written by an "extremist" it does not follow that the  content necessarily is extremist of nature. BTW extremist is a subjective label. Many academics have views which could be viewed as extremist (e.g. Marxism) but their papers are acceptable as a source. SpeakFree (talk) 12:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fjordman cited on wikipedia! 

message: Alma mater means university from which one has graduated. It is not about whether the person is a scholar or not. Jensen graduated from these universities (it is sourced). The master thesis is real. It is published on the website of the University of Oslo. You can read it. Regards -- RJFF (talk) 12:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The notion of "Alma mater" ("nourishing mother") would imply that Fjordman's thinking somehow would have been "nourished" by these universities. This section of the infobox is not appropriate in this case, and the information should be move to the article's body.  Cs32en Talk to me  08:22, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You should not take the expression "alma mater" too literally. It just means the university from which he has graduated. Any politician etc. has an "alma mater" field in their infobox, just stating where they studied. We cannot know whether or not his studies have intellectually nourished him. Usually university studies do nourish one's intellect, right? Kind regards --RJFF (talk) 09:43, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alma Mater 

message: The article states that he "lived and worked at a daycenter for the mentally retarded". Did he actually live there, or just work there? JonFlaune (talk) 14:22, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The source says "living and working". Does "Dagsenter" always imply "day center for the mentally retarded"? -- RJFF (talk) 14:59, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

text: "Dagsenter" can mean any kind of day center - including ones for seniors, children etc.  Collect (talk) 15:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Dagbladet (written edition, Saturday August 6th I believe), mr. Jensen lived and worked at Stiftelsen Radarveien Dagsenter, which is a day center for the mentally retarded. Keanu (talk) 18:12, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

text: No source allowing us to infer that he was "mentally retarded" is found - is there any sound reason why that is of importance in the BLP?  The only only online source given by the way did not make that connection. Cheers.  Collect (talk) 18:17, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, my mistake. Found the article, it was VG, August 6th, page 10. The article can be bought here. The article has an interview and picture of his neighbour, and interview with his boss at the daycenter along with a picture of the daycenter. Got it mixed up and assumed it was the type of daycenter that need employees on watch day and night, and where employees may also live temporarily. Not so in this case, he just worked there. But the center is for mentally retarded people. Keanu (talk) 18:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry again. Now I'm starting to believe in conspiracy theories! The other reference clearly states that he also lived there. Keanu (talk) 19:04, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: And why should we identify him with "mentally retarded" people?    Collect (talk) 19:16, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not, do you have anything against such people? As far as I know mr. Jenson did a great job for society, working at this center to help people less fortunate than himself. Why should the article not mention that? Keanu (talk) 19:28, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The clear attempted inference from "he lived and worked at a center for the mentally retarded" is that he has a mental defect.  As there is no reason for such an infe.wrence, and as the online article cited does not make the claim, we are entirely depended on your assurance that a newspaper article makes that precise claim.  It is SYNTH if they only name the centre and you add another source as to what the centre is, by the way. Cheers. Collect (talk) 19:31, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

text: We usually include the occupation of people in BLPs, though not always the workplace. The wording "lived and worked at a center for the mentally retarded" is somewhat ambiguous, as patients at such centers are sometimes also given work. Thus, we should add a job description such as "personal care assistant" (based on sources) to clarify the meaning.  Cs32en Talk to me  21:35, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did he live at a centre for the mentally retarded? 

message: Hey, why don't we add "influenced: Anders Behring Brevik"? Just think about it; why the hell not?
66.233.55.145 (talk) 16:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: For some giggles

message: He is aganist Islam, so what? Many people who are pro-democracy like Ayaan Hirsi Ali are also against Islam.--95.114.86.242 (talk) 16:06, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  He isnt an ethnocentric 

message: Are there any references that say Fjordman was detained by police after the 2011-7-22 ? (I know that he has been interviewed as a witness by police — and had his computer temporarily confiscated.)
After 2011-7-22, are there any references that say that mug shots of him, have been taken by police?--85.165.229.8 (talk) 12:11, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Norwegian mugshots generally aren't available to the public. __meco (talk) 13:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Detainee; mugshot 

message: The introduction section, in two sentences situated in the middle, used to:
a) claim that Fjordman believes that Muslims are "secretly planning to take over Europe"
b) claim that Fjordman believes in a "conspiracy theory" named "Eurabia". 
The words used introduce Fjordman's beliefs under a conspirational angle which is nowhere to be found in his own writings, and come therefore from the subjective account of a) The Independent, a relatively small British newspaper of liberal leanings and b) a Wikipedia editor. There is clearly a problem of neutrality here, as well as of representation of the real mainstream current. 
Fjordman does not believe in the existence of a secret Muslim plot to seize power, but rather believe that they will seize power naturally and overtly, without the need of a secret plot, through demographic tendencies alone. 
As to Eurabia, very few mainstream sources describe this theory as a "conspiracy theory", but rather as a "false theory" based on false assumptions and numbers. This is not the same thing, words have a meaning.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.182.173.5 (talk) 23:26, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Two WP:SPAs. Stale and I've removed the template but also removed the conspiracy theory bit (although we might be able to replace it if we find more sources) and added another source for "secretly planning to take over Europe", as well as a quote calling for the removal of Muslims which I added in response to a translation request. Dougweller (talk) 13:17, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: POV in introduction section

message: Ole Jørgen Anfindsen's website reads like a fairly regular (that is to say of course, highly noxious) white nationalist page. Or is it because he was interviewed by Aftenposten, and Wikipedia is simply citing the newspaper? Could someone explain, I'm new here.
--Tshloab (talk) 19:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: it's totally undue. i'll remove it.-- altetendekrabbe  20:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is the HonestThinking.org chap's opinion noteworthy? 

message: Just curious, but this opinion piece is so hateful and the comparison out of touch with reality, that is makes me wonder why we should dignify it with mentioning it. Beyond high-brow name-calling, the tidbit is also devoid of actual information on Fjordman. On the other hand, removing it from the article also means removing Fjordman's defense against these demonizing allegations. So what do you think, keeping or removing it? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 01:00, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Including his response was my rationale for rewriting rather than removing it, but I don't have strong feelings that it should be reinstated. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dagsavisen exchange of views 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fjordman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080501073853/http://wo.uio.no:80/as/WebObjects/theses.woa/wa/these?WORKID=21737 to http://wo.uio.no/as/WebObjects/theses.woa/wa/these?WORKID=21737
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:42, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fjordman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110430042505/http://blog.nibrinternational.no/ to http://blog.nibrinternational.no/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://wo.uio.no/as/WebObjects/theses.woa/wa/these?WORKID=21737
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:38, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified