User talk:Berig/Archive 8 (July 10, 2008 - January 4, 2009)

Eyvind Lambi
New article - enjoy! Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 15:03, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice article :)!--Berig (talk) 15:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Question
Hey Berig. I just randomly (as it always happens) encountered your work here and was impressed - was even more impressed when I saw you weren't an admin or such, because usually prolific and regular editors are admins. I saw your failed RfA from two years ago and, I guess, things are different for you now. So I was wondering, are you still interested and do you think you could use the tools? -- Menti  sock  15:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Certainly. I'll ask you later this year, in the meantime, have fun! :-) -- Menti  sock  19:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey again. It's the latter part of the year - do you think you'd like that nom in the near future? -- Menti  sock  11:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure. I'll prepare the nomination in the meantime, then submit/transclude it on the 25th. :-) -- Menti  sock  15:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I created the page here. I hope you're happy with the introduction, and good luck! :-) -- Menti  sock  12:32, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Sigtuna box
The article and pic of the Sigtuna box are very cool. Don't forget to link "ravens" to the raven banner article you created last year. See? Someone still remembers! - House of Scandal (talk) 02:18, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops. Apparently User:Briangotts created raven banner and you worked on it. Well, I was close to correct. - House of Scandal (talk) 02:20, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps "close to correct" should be Wikipedia's motto! - House of Scandal (talk) 16:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * He he, absolutely ;).--Berig (talk) 17:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Sigtuna box

 * Thanks!--Berig (talk) 17:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

My apologies...
Hi Berig, I rarely check email and I just did today, finding a message that you sent in April. I'm sorry for not responding sooner. My talk page is the best place to find me. Thanks so much for asking to nominate me for an admin. I really appreciate it. I'll have to pass at this moment since as it is I spend too much time in the WP but feel free to contact me to work on Beowulf related articles. Regards and thanks again, -Classicfilms (talk) 17:33, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem :). Just tell me if you change your mind about it.--Berig (talk) 07:02, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You bet!! It was very nice of you to suggest it - as I said, I just felt bad that it was asked so long ago and I missed it ... hope you had a good holiday. -Classicfilms (talk) 15:09, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! We went to Scandinavia's biggest amusement park, and I took a lot of pictures when I was in Västergötland that I intend to use on WP :).--Berig (talk) 16:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Looking forward to seeing the photos! -Classicfilms (talk) 16:46, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I have already been adding some of them, but many will have to wait until I have time and material for new articles and sections.--Berig (talk) 16:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Sander's Edda
Bloodofox and I are discussing illustrations from Sander's Edda at Talk:Urðarbrunnr. I'm wondering if you would have some insight into this. Haukur (talk) 11:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but I have no idea.--Berig (talk) 20:24, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'm continuing this here. Haukur (talk) 09:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

 * Thanks!--Berig (talk) 18:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Tryggve the Pretender
New article, enjoy! Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That was a very interesting article!--Berig (talk) 20:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Olaf the Peacock
New article. It's unfinished, and I'll have to come back to it later. But feel free to expand and modify if you care to. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 19:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Sceaf
I added an image to the article. Haukur (talk) 13:11, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Great!--Berig (talk) 19:09, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Moe's illustrations
Pick any three from the Gesta Danorum list at User:Haukurth/Illustrations and I'll upload them :) Haukur (talk) 11:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay! Here's the first one. I'll do the other two later. Haukur (talk) 16:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ket and Wig are here too now. Haukur (talk) 23:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I see that you found the right article for the pic :)--Berig (talk) 19:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Not easily! Went through quite a maze of legendary characters I'm unfamiliar with :) Haukur (talk) 19:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

And the third one is here. Haukur (talk) 07:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I have added it to two relevant articles :).--Berig (talk) 15:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Svenska run-urkunder runestones
Hello, Berig! I uploaded the drawings from part one of Richard Dybeck's Svenska run-urkunder from 1855 just now. You can find them here. They are all Södermanland ones, apart from one Upplandic. I think it's about 44 in all. I will upload part two later, but as it takes a while to identify, edit etc. the images, it might take some time before the next bunch pops up. Thought you'd be interested, –Holt T•C 00:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You will also find four books of the Historia de gentibus septentrionalibus there, I will upload the rest there later too. –Holt T•C 00:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It took a while for me to get around uploading the second bunch, but here they are. (I also uploaded an Ole Worm manuscript, and more Historia... will come this weekend, I think.) –Holt T•C 21:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Your RFA
Best wishes for your RFA --  Tinu  Cherian  - 17:03, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! :)--Berig (talk) 06:20, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Norse History And Culture
While reviewing your RfA, I saw that you are a member of WikiProject Norse History and Culture. Lately, I have taken on the daunting task of assessing all of the Unassessed articles tagged with the projects template. Would you like to help? ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 13:49, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have stayed away from tagging unassessed articles because I am the main contributor of so many of them and that makes me think that other editors are better judges of their relative importance. However, I'll help you out with those I haven't written when my rfa is finished.--Berig (talk) 13:56, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

RFA congrats

 *  — Rlevse • Talk  • 13:54, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! :) Haukur (talk) 14:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Congrats. I knew you'd make it. :-) -- Menti  sock  14:58, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Remember, when in doubt, WP:DDTMP. Oh, and try not to block Jimbo, if you can help it! –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  15:06, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats, but please don't block me! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 15:26, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Not if you behave :-)--Berig (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It is long overdue and well earned, my friend! Of course the real challenge has just begun-To try and restore good judgment and mature temperament to the admin corps(e). --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 16:17, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats on your successful RFA. Kensplanet  Talk  Contributions  16:23, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Berig (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats, Berig! Here's your t-shirt for regaining your tools. :) 17:01, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, Berig. Well earned! –Holt T•C 17:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Congratulations! ....on your successful RFA, best wishes and thanks for leaving a note on my talk page --  Tinu  Cherian  - 17:39, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers! Gwen Gale (talk) 18:20, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome for the support! :) Acalamari 18:37, 1 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey! Congratz Bro! /\ _ /\ [[Image:718smiley.png|25px]] II MusLiM HyBRiD II ZOMG BBQ  18:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the club (knobbly bits are for vandals, and the nails are for trolls)! LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:35, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * He he :)--Berig (talk) 21:44, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Well done on successfully becoming an admin, all the best. Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:55, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats, indeed! Ecoleetage (talk) 22:23, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on your RfA, while I opposed, it we more from a technical perspective than anything personal... I have no doubt you'll use the tools productively. Congrats.--- Balloonman  PoppaBalloon 14:31, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Wield thy mop with pride, you've earned it twice over!  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  15:28, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Congrats. Now get to work. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 20:24, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Username
Thank you for your kind comment (here). — Athaenara ✉  00:05, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Rune navbox
Your contribution is requested on the rune template talk page. I wish to develop a navbox format for the template, so that it complies with the other templates of the Norse and Germanic topics, as well as the Wikipedia standard. Any ideas on how to format the rune-rows? –Holt T•C 15:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Danish axe rename
Is it not common wikipedia policy to have a discussion regarding renaming articles before carrying out the actual renaming of the article? --Saddhiyama (talk) 15:19, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I was bold and renamed it according to WP policy for naming articles.--Berig (talk) 16:53, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I am no expert, but after googling it seems there is about the same amount of hits on "Danish axe" and "Viking axe", which is why I though that more "common usage" was a bit questionable, and thus not in accordance with the policy for naming articles. I will repeat that I am no expert, but it just seems that when it is not entirely clear from the outset, it should be one of those matters that needs discussion before actual action. --Saddhiyama (talk) 17:15, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * When I google I get only 2,310 hits for "Danish axe", which is ambiguous (aren't axes still produced in Denmark?) and as many as 9,790 hits for "Viking axe" which is not ambiguous. Maybe you should try to insert the names between quotation marks when you google. Otherwise you'll get any combination of "Danish" and "axe".--Berig (talk) 17:26, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes that did the job. But "viking axe" is not entirely unambiguous either, as the Danish axe was the pole-arm version only, while there did exist other types of viking axes (both for combat and for woodcutting). --Saddhiyama (talk) 17:36, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, it appears to me that "Viking axe" is both much more common and much less ambiguous than "Danish axe". If you feel strongly that I am in the wrong, I suggest that you request a reversal of the renaming on the relevant talkpage.--Berig (talk) 17:41, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I will let it be as I do not know enough on the subject of the Viking Age to make a decision on the naming issue. My main reason was the question of the renaming of an article without creating a consensus first. I have learned that boldness can be a useful tool indeed. --Saddhiyama (talk) 19:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, boldness is usually good, since most WP editors have common sense. Be bold if you feel you are doing the right thing, but be prepared to discuss your decisions afterwards :).--Berig (talk) 19:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Have an image
Image:King Svafrlame Secures the Sword Tyrfing.jpg Haukur (talk) 10:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! It's a nice picture and I have added it to Tyrfing.--Berig (talk) 17:29, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Various Scandinavian language discussions
Hey. I guess you remember me from the Proto-Norse/Old Norse tal pages? I was just wondering, if it isn't to forward, what field of research you are in? You say you live in Scandinavia and have a Ph. D., are you affiliated with a university? It strikes me that we can probably communicate in our mother tongues as well, unless you only speak sámi, which I find somewhat improbable. I am an aspiring academic myself, so it is interesting to encounter someone who has been in the field for some time. You can reply on my talk page, if you like. Cheers, Alexlykke (talk) 20:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand, of course. My main interest was actually whether you were an historian, a linguist, a runologist, an archaeologist or something else. But I do understand that you do not want to divulge too much information here. My best guess would historian or archaeologist. But that's just that, a guess.--Alexlykke (talk) 09:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! I felt the phrasing was a un-academic, so I decided to re-phrase it, and ad a reliable source. It's nice to get positive feedback! I should have known that it's 'distinguish', not 'distinguate'. It's a case of translation of a Norwegian loan word to an English one, you know.--Alexlykke (talk) 20:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:Your Assessement Drive
Thank you for your help. I checked some of your contribs and agree with all of your assessements. Please keep up the great work. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 03:50, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Roderick renaming
Normally, it is a good idea to at least float a renaming on the talk page of an article before doing it. Roderick (name) was used as the title in a uniform approach to articles about names, as opposed to Roderick (disambiguation) which would list all of the people named Roderick who have articles in the Wikipedia. Usually the default is left to the disambiguation page, with a dab on the disambiguation page to the name article. In other words, there was a good reason for the title of that article being Roderick (name). --Bejnar (talk) 18:54, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright, there you are.--Berig (talk) 19:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Assessement
Sorry if some of my assessements were off. I wholehartedly agree that articles dealing with Sweden are just as important, it just didn't appear as though those articles were. Also, are the Germanic People considered to fall under this project's scope? I just reached those articles, and me is confused. Thanks, ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 00:16, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the articles on more general Germanic topics only belong if there aren't specific Norse articles already covering the same subjects in more detail. Germanic peoples does not belong because whe have articles like Norsemen and Vikings, and likewise an article like Germanic paganism doesn't belong since we have Norse mythology and Norse paganism. However, Germanic chieftain is within the scope since there's no "Norse chieftain" article, and Germanic monarchy belongs since there is no article "Norse monarchy" (and none should be needed). I do think Germania (book) is very much within the scope of the project since it is usually referred to in Scandinavian history books.--Berig (talk) 10:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. Back to assessing. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 02:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback
Thanks for your input at my successful Rfa. I'm already thinking about working on my content creation. Hopefully in a few months, I'll have passed the point where you would've !voted Support. If you have any more equally well-thought-out suggestions on how I can improve myself as an editor, I'd be happy to hear them. Happy editing!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 20:59, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Assessement Drive
Just an update on the progress so far. There are currently 999 articles left to do, down from ~1600 a few months ago. Thanks for helping me out!

An another note, do you know how I could get the word out to get more people involved, so that this doesn't take too long? ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:51, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 16:09, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Harald Eiriksson
Could you please look at this article and the question I left on the talk page? Thanks, ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 19:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure.--Berig (talk) 20:03, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Mord Fiddle
New article. Feel free to add to it as you see fit! Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 19:12, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but I don't know if I can find anything to add about him.--Berig (talk) 20:23, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Wayland Smith tag removal
Hello Berig, I noticed that you recently removed the tags I added to the Wayland Smith article ([]) after my cleanup. My placement of these tags is intended to let others know that the article has issues that need to be addressed when reading it; there's more to be added and there are no inline citations in the article. Further, the tags also let me know (and ideally others) what ought to be done to improve the article at a glance. In time, I intend to get around to rewriting the article (unless someone does it first), and I find said tags handy. bloodofox: (talk) 14:25, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Personally, I have never added any such tags to an article, simply because I think they make articles look unnecessarily spurious and messy. I find it much more constructive to simply rewrite the article adding inline citations to the sources I have at hand.--Berig (talk) 14:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd like to do this, but I'm currently trying to bring some articles in particular up to GA status after doing complete rewrites for them (Valkyrie, Einherjar, and Yggdrasil). I'll bring them up to GA status once I am done with these and I have more of my books again (I only have a few of them with for a few more days). Messy, perhaps, but I think a fair warning is important, and the tags do exist after all. I won't revert your removal of them, but at least you know why I use them. bloodofox: (talk) 14:39, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I prefer tags, since they indicate what particular users consider problematic.--Berig (talk) 14:54, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Hábrók
Hey. I was recently going through assessing articles and came across this one. Not wishing to jump the gun on the AfD, as I did previously, I thought it would be good to notify you and the original contributor (who doesn't seem to be too active, thus me notifying you) about it. I'm unable to find any sources for it. Could it possibly be a hoax? Thanks for your time, ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 02:59, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. I found a verifiable ref. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 03:10, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Hörgr
Sorry, I didn't see the parenthetical references inline references. Retagging. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 16:01, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

FAR
The purpose of the feature article review process is to review existing FAs that have fallen below existing quality standards. As such I have delisted your FAR of Greece Runestones. You would be better served at Peer Review or asking some of the FAC regulars for a review. Joelito (talk) 14:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it was a mistake. I intended to nominate it for FAC.--Berig (talk) 15:39, 4 January 2009 (UTC)