Talk:Bohus Fortress

Untitled
Thanks for catching the error. The price of rapid translation is sometimes loss of accuracy.

Now the next step is to integrate this with the Bohus Fortress entry. But taht will wait for another day.

Williamborg 02:01, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Well, with the new Category naming policy, Båhus is now listed as a "Fort in Norway" Fornadan (t) 21:26, 4 October 2005 (UTC)


 * This fortress in not in Norway, I changed the categories. I also don't see why it should be called Båhus Fortress and not Bohus Fortress? // Fred-Chess 21:06, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Exactly why Båhus? --Dahlis 13:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Only historical reasons, but the fortress is located in Sweden where Bohus is the only known name, and the name Bohus is used in Norway as well. Redir. Filip5 13:59, 28 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The original article naming of Båhus (Bohus) was based on the Norwegian naming conventions in WikiProject Norway. That would suggest that it was composed in a Norwegian historical context since the fortress was constructed when that area was in Norway. Hardly surprising - this fortress is symbolically more important to Norwegians that to Swedes, so the references to Norwegian history were perhaps more relevant to them than to the Swedish article’s authors.
 * The redirection process appears to me flawed, since the redirected site is no longer accessible and one can't check to see that all of the material has been transferred to the new location. How does one go back & look at the previous version to see what was accurately transferred?
 * Williamborg 16:35, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The move was incorrectly made and needs to be fixed by an administrator. / Fred-Chess 17:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Support move
I support the move. I don't think anyone has argued against it, & the move was proposed months ago. And to a degree it is moot; it has already been moved. But I would just like to see the old Båhus page to confirm there is no loss of content - since there was an existing page, the two needed to be integrated. Williamborg 05:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Go here and use the history to see the old versions. . / Fred-Chess 22:10, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Appreciate the link. Thanks - Williamborg 02:17, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Article move corrected
I moved and merged the two articles. Everything should be in order now, if not, let me know. / Fred-Chess 06:43, 11 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Great. Can now see how this came together. And it displays the work that is still undone - ah well... Thanks Williamborg 19:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the decision to use the present name generally. But I think we should use the Norwegian spelling when the fortress and province is referenced as Norwegian. Also the fort should be categorized with the other Norwegian forts as it was built by Norway and was so important to Norway and not at all important to Sweden. But maybe the category name Forts in Norway makes that impossible?Inge 20:06, 11 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The category used to be called "Norwegian Forts", but was then renamed as a part of a universal change in naming policy. Fornadan (t) 01:01, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 05:41, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Stone/brick or wood?
It would be nice to get more detailed information about the statement that the castle was made of stone and brick as early as 1310. The chronicle "Erikskrönikan" (existing recapitualtions from the 15th century, first edition believed to be written about 1325, less than 20 years after work was started on Bohus) clearly says that it was built "of wood and not of stone" (aff trä ok ey aff steen, chapter 59) when it was erected in the first decade of 1300. An architect from the 2100 century claims to have better information; that is of course interesting and needs to be further explained. Also interesting to get suggestions as to why the author(s) of Erikskrönikan would lie when the obvious evidence could still be whitnessed by anyone who cared to take a look. Finally, the author of the article should explain why he/she use Erikskrönikan to support the idea that count Jakob of Halland planted the idea of the castle in the kings mind, and the same time ignores the following sentence about the materials used... or is count Jakob mentioned in any other source regarding Bohus?

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bohus Fortress. 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/20140213070457/http://kungalv.se/Besoksanlaggningar/Bohusfastning/ to http://www.kungalv.se/Besoksanlaggningar/Bohusfastning/

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) 00:42, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bohus Fortress. 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/20140908062229/http://www.sfv.se/sv/sevardheter/vastra-gotalands/bohus-fastning/ to http://www.sfv.se/sv/sevardheter/vastra-gotalands/bohus-fastning/

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) 19:41, 2 December 2017 (UTC)