Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Norse history and culture
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Norse_history_and_culture".

Anglo-Saxons

One question to decide on early on is, to what extent will this Wikiproject focus on the Anglo-Saxon peoples? They are closely related to the Norsemen, worshipped (before Christianization) the same gods, celebrated the same holidays, spoke a mutually-intelligible language, and in large part came from the same geographic region. Plus a lot of the literature shares common characters and themes (Beowulf/Hrolf Kraki). Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 15:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps until the Battle of Stamford Bridge and the Battle of Hastings. Those are traditionally seen by historians as the end of the Viking era in England, and the shift of Norse influence into Norman influence on the Anglo-Saxons. --Grimhelm 16:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Well Angles were mainly from Jutland (and likely southern Sweden, at least Philip Dixon puts to this in his 'Barbarian Europe')and obviously make up a large percentage of Danes (Danes are newer, named after King Dan formed from numerous tribes around southern Sweden and Jutland) so I would say yes. I agree with Grimhelm we should focus on the English people until 1066, even if the English were (and correctly still are) Anglo-Saxons. King Óðinn The Aesir 19:46, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Knowledge structure

I find myself facing an interesting dilemma here: I have an examen artium from a Norwegian high school, worked for a year at a Norwegian ethnological museum Hedmark Museum, and have lots of interest in this area; yet, I'm not sure how we should structure this body of knowledge for purposes of editing (to-do lists) and reading (navigation templates, etc.). But I'll throw out some ideas as a strawman, and don't be shy about shooting them down:

• History, i.e., events that are documented in historical times
  • Events, such as battles, unions, etc.
  • Personalities, such as kings, earls, chieftans, etc.
• Ethnology and archeology
• Political geography, tied in with history
• Literature, especially sagas
• Language and linguistics
• Mythology (?)
• Religious history

--Leifern 18:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I think this is a logical division. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 18:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Ancient Germanic culture

We should probably coordinate somehow with the folks who run this portal. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 19:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't know that portal existed. King Óðinn The Aesir 19:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I have been maintaining this portal for a few weeks now, trying to get it up and running. I've put in a few hours, but it has a long, long way to go. I am also currently trying to drum up interest in an Ancient Germanic culture taskforce or project. If anyone is interested, please let me or someone from Project European History know. Thanks. Aryaman (☼) 22:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

There is now a proposed task force of this project to deal with the Ancient Germanic peoples at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Ancient Germanic peoples. Anyone interested in potentially working in that group should indicate their interest there. Thank you. Aryaman (☼) 14:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

You have done impressive work and you have all my moral support. Unfortunately, I already have too many articles on my to-do list.--Berig (talk) 14:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Help with references for mythological aspect in Common Raven

Hi all, I'm involved with Wikiproject Birds getting Common Raven up toward (hopefully) an FA. Was wondering if anyone had any references for Huginn and Munnin in Norse mythology to slot into the bottom of the Common Raven article? Much appreciated in advance. cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 01:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The Hugin and Munin article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugin_and_Munin), while not being as detailed as I would like) as information about them. You should describe them in brief and add a link to that article. I will try to find some reliable links and sources also.King Óðinn The Aesir 19:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye out for the sources; thanks for helping out. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 22:33, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe someone who is not "tainted" by being "Nordic" could help out in this dispute

Rokus01 has been in a dispute with me and Dbachmann during a few days. Rokus01 is polarizing his own theory that the Dutch are West Germanic since the stone age with the (mainstream and traditional) "tainted" "Nordic" theory that the Germanic tribes had their origins in the Jastorf culture and the Nordic Bronze Age. He claims to know what is the modern view of things and what is obsolete but he shows a surprising lack of familiarity with archaeological terminology and when opposed he pleads what has been called "the crank's last resort", i.e. that "everything is uncertain". He also refers to sources which have little to do with his claims (e.g. Looijenga's work on runes). I find his argumentation both incoherent and confusing and would rather someone with an interest in the time period, and who is not anything as horrible as "Nordic" read his contributions.--Berig 12:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Lists of kings and tying them together with boxes

Clicking my way around Legendary Danish kings, I noticed a lack of consistency between the list presented there and the linked list of boxes at the bottom of each article.

For example, in the list at Legendary Danish kings, I see this succession:

• Haldanus I
• Ro
• Helgo
• Rolvo Krake
• Høtherus

...while the linked list starting at Halfdan (Haldanus I) says:

• Haldanus I
• Helgi or Heorogar
• Hrólfr Kraki (if you follow the link through Halga).
• "No two sources agree"

Now, I understand that there are different sources with different opinions and all that, but I think a particular linked list should match exactly one and only one listed sequence. If different sources disagree, I think that should be reflected by splitting the box in two, e.g. the box in Hrólfr Kraki could look like this:

Also, the titles of the link boxes differs between "Saxo's kings of Denmark" and "Legendary Danish kings". I think each linked list should show one official source, with the title of the box referring to the source. That way, it would all be consistent. (This is also how it seems to be done with all the official Danish kings, as listed in List of Danish monarchs.)

I wouldn't mind making such changes, but I don't know enough about the topic to find the official sources.

Does anybody have any opinions about this? Can anyone point me to other lists than Saxo's?

Sverre 10:31, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I gave this some consideration when I made the succession boxes, but I was too lazy at the time to work out a solution such as yours. It sounds like a good idea, and since I have the source material necessary to fix it, I guess I'll do it later today :).--Berig 11:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

PS. There is an additional problem here which more or less made me give up when I made the succession boxes. In Sweden, there could only be one Swedish king, since the office was by definition tied to Uppsala öd and the temple at Uppsala. If Sweden split up there would be a king of Södermanland, a king of Närke and so forth, but not more than one Swedish king, which makes succession boxes quite easy. In Denmark on the other hand there were several Danish kings anytime Denmark split up in Funen, Zealand and Skåne. This means that after Hrólfr Kraki we have to divide the Danish kings into the one that ruled Zealand and the one who ruled Skåne. Since Saxo has one version of how Denmark split up, and Icelandic sources have a different version with other names, it easily becomes a succession box mess.--Berig 13:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for considering it. I understand that it could turn into a mess. I do see that in other topics, some people have many succession boxes attached to them, showing all the different titles they held, and how those titles were inherited. I guess it would be possible to do the same here, especially if Saxo's splitting had different names than the Icelandic sources. Obviously, I don't have the full answer on how to do it, I just wanted to point out the inconsistencies of today's boxes... Sverre 18:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I will probably give it a go in a while. I will have to think about it first, and it will probably be something like the solutions I made for Ivar Vidfamne and Sigurd Ring.--Berig 18:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Controversial rename proposal, give your opinion!

Eric of Good Harvests should be moved to Eirik Arsale or possibly Erik Årsäll! Or not!! Discuss! Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 19:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll admit right out that I'm no historian, linguist or expert of any sort, but it seems to me that linguistic parallels could very well be drawn between Idunn, the goddess with the garden of apples of life, and Eden, the garden with tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It just doesn't seem far fetched, especially with other extant parallels such as the goddess Hel and the underworld Hell (although that could be a Hades/Hades thing...). Am I way off or does this sound good? RussellDLM 04:50, 11 July 2007 (UTC)RussellDLM

FAR

Sverre of Norway has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Savidan 06:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

History of Greenland has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

names

Does anyone know of a website or some other resource that would have either (a) hard and fast rules for giving the possessive form of Old Norse names or (b) a list of Old Norse names and their possessive forms? Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 19:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Timeline

Why is it that the timeline links to Early Swedish history and Modern Sweden, but not the corresponding articles for the other Nordic countries? To me it looks like a very severe case of bias. Sakkura 13:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The timeline was made especially for Swedish history before this project was created, and no one has bothered making a new timeline for all of Scandinavia.--Berig 13:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

collaboration of the history projects

Hi, I'm newly appointed coordinator of the Wikipedia: WikiProject History. I was coordinator of the Wikipedia: WikiProject Military History before. My scope is to improve the cooperation among the different history projects andf use the synergy of a common infrastructure to improve article quality. One idea would be to merge small project into a larger wikiproject history with a common infrastructure and the small projects continuing independently as task forces of this project. What are your suggestions? Greetings Wandalstouring 15:18, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I am not against the idea which may be a good one, but I see this project mainly as a meeting place for people who are interested in the subject.--Berig 15:40, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Creating a meeting-place with more synergy effects is exactly my scope. For example, the reasons why the featured articles in wikipedia are dominated by military history is the synergy effect of a large working project. Wandalstouring 17:04, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

The reason "featured articles in wikipedia are dominated by military history" is that the project applies their tags to articles which have little to do with military history, and which the project did nothing to create or improve. Ivan Alexander of Bulgaria? David I of Scotland? Llywelyn the Great? Tiridates I of Armenia? Et cetera, et cetera. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:05, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I have been working in this project and it does have a constant tagging of all sorts of articles. The average quality is better than in other projects and this can not only be based on random tagging of rulers who did wage wars. However, I am not here to argue about that. Wandalstouring 10:13, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

NavBoxes

Articles in this project need some Navboxes. Especially Vikings imo. Anyone have more experience than me in making them? --dotDarkCloud (talk) 16:56, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I have some experience, but I must admit that my method mostly consists of trial and error by using older user boxes as models.--Berig (talk) 12:22, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies

WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies has finally gained enough support to justify its creation as a daughter project of WikiProject History. Before doing this, however, good sense dictates conferring with WikiProject Norse history and culture, as the fields covered by the two projects intersect and, to some degree, overlap.

The Ancient Germanic studies WikiProject intends to cover the history, language and culture of the Ancient Germanic peoples from their earliest beginnings around 500 BCE to ca. 1000 CE. Our chronological scope is derived mainly from the field of linguistics, with the First Sound Shift (ca. 500 BCE) marking the beginning of the Ancient or Old Germanic period and the change from the ‘Old’ to the ‘Middle’ dialects (High German ca. 1000, English 1066, Norse ca. 1100) marking its end.

This new WikiProject is felt to be necessary as at present all effort to coordinate and standardize articles related to the Ancient Germanic peoples has been that of a few isolated individuals. There is no medium for discussing and working on multi-article projects – something which has caused and continues to cause both unnecessary friction between editors as well as discrepancies between articles. And there is no group-effort to improve articles on Ancient Germanic peoples outside of Scandinavia (i.e. the Goths, the Burgundians, the Vandals, etc.) and to coordinate these with their Northern counterparts. There is a related portal, Ancient Germanic culture, which is a first attempt at covering the Ancient Germanic peoples as a whole. But the portal lacks the administrative infrastructure that a full-fledged WikiProject can provide.

The creation of the Ancient Germanic studies WikiProject does not automatically entail either a forced merge with WikiProject Norse history and culture nor its being subsumed into the same as a task force. WikiProject Norse history and culture would still cover fields which would remain outside the scope of Ancient Germanic studies, and remains justified as a WikiProject due to the sheer enormity of literature that comes with the topic. It would, however, entail making it a partly autonomous daughter project of WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies.

As members of this WikiProject, your thoughts and comments on this development would be highly valued. —Aryaman (Enlist!) 17:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure. It's only natural if the two projects are closely tied together.--Berig (talk) 18:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

FYI: The WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies project page is up. It will take a few days before things are ready for 'business', however. —Aryaman (Enlist!) 01:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:User WP:Norse

If nobody minds, I'd like to edit Template:User WP:Norse into something more runestone-like rather than the bright orange that it is now. I'll go ahead and do so as it doesn't seem to be widely used but if there are any objections to my edits we can certainly revert it. :bloodofox: (talk) 10:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

List of Norwegian monarchs

Hello, I put the List of Norwegian monarchs up at the Peer review. If you have any comments/suggestions, please share them here. Thank you.--Crzycheetah 19:50, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:10, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Prayers in pre-Christian Norse culture

A peer review of the article Prayer pointed out that the article does not mention prayers in pre-Christian Viking culture. If someone would like to assist us in correcting this flaw, even if it's only by pointing out an existing Wikipedia article that addresses Viking prayers, it would be appreciated. Thank you in advance. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 13:14, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I have since added this. See: Prayer#Germanic_paganism. :bloodofox: (talk) 13:26, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

A discussion

An important discussion on " Should WikiProjects get prior approval of other WikiProjects (Descendant or Related or any ) to tag articles that overlaps their scope ? " is open here . We welcome you to participate and give your valuable opinions. -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - , member of WikiProject Council. 14:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 2048 articles are assigned to this project, of which 283, or 13.8%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia: Signpost

Hi! I've taken on the WikiProject feature of the Wikipedia Signpost, and thought this project seemed an interesting choice. Would you be interested in being interviewed for it? What I'd do is ask a lot of questions here, and then edit down the discussions a bit to get the highlights [linking to the full discussion at the bottom]. It's basically a chance for you to get the word out about your WikiProject.

Actual interview questions will be written when I'm not half-asleep, and should be more coherent. =)

Thanks, Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 11:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Norse history and culture interview by Shoemaker's Holiday

Before we start, let me apologise if I seem a little inexperienced at this. That is because I am: this is my first interview of a WikiProject, and my first work for the Signpost. That said, I'm motivated to get this right. We'll start off with some of the fairly obvious questions, and then go on to more in-depth ones.

Before we begin, can you introduce yourselves, and attempt to give some idea of what sort of work you do in theWikiProject Norse history and culture ?

• I'm bloodofox (talk · contribs). I mainly focus on things relating to Germanic paganism here on Wikipedia. This includes Norse paganism (and Norse mythology), easily the best attested form of Germanic paganism. Consequently, the work I do here generally falls under the header of this project or Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• Briangotts (talk · contribs); I began the project and maintain the project's homepage (updating article requests and the like). I also attempt to sort the tagged articles by class and importance, and improve important articles by sourcing, etc. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 21:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• I am Skadinaujo (talk · contribs). My main contributions to this project are to the religious and cultural aspects of the Norse society. I also largely focus on the general pre-Christian Scandinavia and Europe, where the Norse period is the latest and one of the shortest periods of my area of interest. As with Bloodofox, nearly all the work I do here falls under the header of this project and the Ancient Germanic studies. –Skadinaujo T•C 13:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Tell us a bit about the project itself.

• The project is designed to organize efforts relating to improving articles on Norse history and culture, as well as providing a place for people to discuss relevant issues (such as uniform transliteration, presentation of conflicting sources). Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 21:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• I don't know if there's much to tell about the WikiProject as a whole. As has been stated elsewhere, it's basically something of a hub for a wide variety of subjects falling under the banner of "Norse". :bloodofox: (talk) 03:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

What recent achievements of this project are you most proud of?

• The project's members have managed to get a number of articles raised to GA and FA status, including Raven Banner, Gunnhild Mother of Kings, and Rus' Khaganate. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 21:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• I was glad to bring up Ragnarök to WP:GA status after it had been featured here as a "collaboration of the week". I am also glad that Æsir-Vanir War is now GA status. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

The scope of your project is rather broad, covering not just the history of the Viking period, but back to the Nordic Bronze Age and forward to the High Middle Ages, after the conversion of the Norse to Christianity, and then it adds Norse mythology, and literature as well. In addition, as the Norse had such a major effect on Europe in the Viking Age, the project's remit gets stretched even further, to places and people affected by the raiding Vikings. How does having such a broad remit affect the project's organisation?

• I think it allows members to focus on areas of particular interest to them. For example, User:Berig's special area of interest is the study of runestones and Norse sagas. User:Grimhelm and User:Berig tend to focus more on viking interaction with the east, particularly in early Russia. User:Leifern is a Norway-specialist, and User:Haukurth appears more oriented to Iceland. There's room for a very broad array of interests in the project. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 21:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• There's always something to write about. I don't think there's any particular organisation here to speak of - as Haukur said, we're basically a loose bunch of individuals who may encounter one another on related articles from time to time that treat this WikiProject as something of a bulletin board now and then. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• I think the project's members are not as closely knit together when it comes to editing and discussing as with projects with a narrower range, and this makes this more of a general meetingplace and an organ for consultance rather than a direct organizer. There is much individual work, and people usally stick to what interests them, be it battles, important historic figures, saga literature or Norse mythology. –Skadinaujo T•C 13:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

One thing I've noticed during my time on Wikipedia is the really wonderful depth of coverage for Norse mythology and culture here, at least in the Viking age. Though some of the articles are fairly short, and many could use more referencing, even the shortest article seems to be inevitably well-written and informative. Can you tell us about some of your working methods?

• I think this is a function of the excellent and intelligent people who work on the articles. I'm not sure that there is any one "working method" used by the project members. I generally get started on an article and then notify people who I think will be interested in working on it (both on the project talk and on user talk pages); we then collaborate on improving and expanding as we're able. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 21:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• I have developed a system. I am currently compiling a guide to assist others that may want to start editing related articles that may not know how to approach it. There are a limited number of sources when it comes to Norse mythology. As for the status of the articles on Wikipedia falling under this header, they're usually free of the nonsense you'll find elsewhere on the internet (thanks largely to the efforts of the WikiProject Norse history and culture ), but I find myself outright rewriting articles at times. These rewrites are not always due to the quality of the article as much as because they're just stubs, but every now and then you'll find an article within the scope that is just completely loaded with baseless nonsense or presenting a theory as fact - if it isn't well referenced, proceed with caution. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• The basic cookie-cutter method is to start by summarizing everything the primary sources say about the subject and then, in a separate section, covering scholarly interpretations and theories. For example, I've used this method at Four stags of Yggdrasill. Bloodofox now has it down to a science. The advantages are that this is almost always applicable and easy to set up. It also helps to provide a neutral perspective and separate speculative theories from facts (though of course there are always gray areas). The disadvantage is that this is not always the most readable representation for the casual reader. Haukur (talk) 11:40, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• As Bloodofox and Haukur describe, there ways of approaching an article that are extremely useful and present the information in a fair way. I have adopted these methods, and hope that more people will agree on applying this style to the articles they write or rewrite. –Skadinaujo T•C 13:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

You also have eight featured articles and twenty good articles. Are there any current drives for more such content?

• Nothing organized, although from time to time a project member will organize colleagues to work on something or other. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• I can personally say that every article that I edit I intend to bring up to WP:GA status. I will soon have four articles pending for GA status at once, and there will be more to come. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

If someone reading this was interested in joining this project, what would you say to convince them to join?

• There's lots of work still left to do. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 21:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• I would only recommend that someone join a WikiProject if they're interested in editing articles relating to the subject matter at hand as it would be pretty pointless otherwise. Meeting that requirement, I would presume that the WikiProject can be helpful in discussing general matters relating to, in this case, Norse history and culture. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

What makes working on articles about Norse topics different from working on other articles?

• Can we keep in mind that articles are written by people, not nebulous projects? :) This project is, in my opinion, useful as a bulletin board for posting questions and material of common interest but most of the work being done is something the individual members were doing already before the project was created. Maybe I'm just behind the times but as someone who's been here for a few years I just don't feel the Wikiprojects are particularly important for successful Wikipedia articles.

But maybe I can take a break from yelling "You kids get off my lawn!" and try to actually tell you something. I think a good question to ask would be: What makes working on articles about Norse topics different from working on other articles? I think one important point is that the English-speaking world has been interested in medieval Norse culture for a long time so there is a lot of public domain material out there. Many of the important sources had already been translated to English by the early 20th century and have been made available on the Web by the various public domain projects. The originals in Old Norse are also widely available. Something similar may be said for artwork - we are fortunate that there is a large amount of public domain paintings and drawings out there, particularly art inspired by Norse mythology. This is a big help when it comes to creating attractive articles. In this way I think the success of Wikipedia in this area builds on the public domain and the efforts of various projects outside Wikipedia which aim at making public domain material available. That's not to say we don't make use of modern scholarship - we do, but the public domain materials often form a good starting point. Even when we don't have the latest interpretations and cutting edge theories we often have a good summary of what the primary sources say. Haukur (talk) 23:05, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• For me, it's just that I am particularly interested in the subject matter. Haukur also has a point in that there's a vast amount of material available out there to draw upon that falls into the realm of public domain, which is handy. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Agreed on almost every point, and I don't mean to over-emphasise the project, it's just a convenient way of shining light on a group of people doing good work, and referring to the people in the project as a whole. But I've added in your excellent question, and will certainly use your response Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 23:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Notice on Interview

I'm going to give it a couple more days in case anyone else wants to respond. There's a little chaos with a report I've inherited, and was asked to clean up, so it may run in one week, and may run in two, but I'll let you know as soon as I do. =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 22:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Haraldskær Woman

I'm bringing this articles GA Sweeps review, which can be found here, to the attention of this project. The article has been placed on hold pending some attention to citations. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)