Talk:Aristocracy of Norway

message: I noted this:
> One of the earliest known letters patent is from 1458, given to Sjøfar and Nils Sigurdssøner by King Eric III.
Seems very dubious. King Eric III was deposed, and was not king of Norway after 1442.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.189.110.153 (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Time/date problems

message: * ancestrylink of one of Romer children of Gro & Mads
* link to Erling Vidkunsonn - descendants, as soon as it ready
* link to Jon Raud's descendants
--- Suedois 23:15, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Note to self

message: I have now removed the following list containing families that are or were not of the Norwegian nobility.
Foreign noble families without recognition as Dano-Norwegian nobility
* von Bülow (German.)
* de Coucheron (Dutch.) (French?)
* de Créqui dit la Roche (French.)
* von Ditten (From Mecklenburg.)
* von Haffner (German.)
* Kaltenborn (German.)
* von Koss (German.)
* von Krogh (German.)
* Michelet (French.)
* Paus (Pauss, de Paus) (Norwegian family, whereof one branch ennobled as counts by the Pope.)
* Rokling (Roclenge) (French.)
* Rughaaz (German. The name is Norwegianised into Rugaas.)
* Scheel (Skeel) (German. Allegedly unproven.)
* Schlanbusch (German.)
* Scheufel (Suffel, von Schuffelli) (German.)
* de Seue (French.)
* Stibolt (Danish.)
* Tillisch
* Weltzin (Allegedly unproven.)
* Zernichow
 Breadbasket 19:36, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Foreign nobility in Norway

message: Terms being given, without citation to reliable sources, as translations of Norwegian titles into English, e.g. "Fief count", "Fief baron" and "National baron" are not prevalent in English. They should not be used, per Neologisms. Not every non-English title has an English version that is used prevalently as a translation and when not, neologisms may not be substituted as though they are in standard English use. Variations on countly and baronial titles may simply be left as "Count" or "Baron" or can be left untranslated. That's better than making up a translation and using it as a neologism in the article. FactStraight (talk) 18:11, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If the neologism is gaining currency, it's fine. That said, unsourced/unsourceable WP:OR is bad, sure. — LlywelynII 12:18, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Neologisms as title translations

message: Interesting essay but part about "Primeval aristocracy" can be deleted or drastically shortened, as matter of this part is better covered in other articles and hardly is there  direct connection between mediaeval or modern nobility and eg. "North Sea Land". Please read WP:CFORK, because this part is too long for accepted short summary introduction.--Yopie (talk) 23:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, don't be WP:POINTy. Blanking good info is almost always inappropriate, although you're right that hatnote links to better articles may serve the same function or that forking out articles on the subsections with quick glosses here might be appropriate as the article grows in length. — LlywelynII 12:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primeval aristocracy 

message: The article is lovely, but needs a pretty good scrubbing. The intro uses too many POVy, peacocking terms (i.e., "supreme social, political, military class" to refer to Viking warlords) without actually providing a quick overview  the whole point of an intro, remember  of the Norse versus Danish origins of the aristocracy or (even worse) clearly stating that the whole class no longer exists except via the Danish peerage.
Also, some editor forgot WP:ENGVAR and Briticized the page's American English. I'll fix something up over the next day or two and then we can debate anything too contentious. — LlywelynII 12:39, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Revision

message: I've tagged this article with  today. Even though the article is well referenced for the parts up to the 18th century, there are very few general sources for the period after the new constitution of 1814. I can't find any sources for generalizing statements such as "several families maintained an aristocratic profile" nor "members of these families continued to play a significant rôle in the political and social life of the country" and neither for "Today this social class is a marginal factor in the community, culturally and socially as well as politically". Sources from modern history are most likely available, and should be added. Bw Orland (talk) 10:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refimprove 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Aristocracy of Norway. 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/20120111071023/http://www.vigerust.net/adel/adelhovedindex.html to http://www.vigerust.net/adel/adelhovedindex.html
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) 02:01, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Aristocracy of Norway. 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/20110717053800/http://www.vigerust.net/adel/adel1824_innstilling.html to http://www.vigerust.net/adel/adel1824_innstilling.html
*Added  tag to http://miljo.npolar.no/placenames/pages/detailn.asp?placeNameID=216161E
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130214015455/http://tux1.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/d169647.htm to http://tux1.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/d169647.htm
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) 01:41, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This is yet another article where the author(s) seem(s) to have erroneously believed that "Norse" means "Norwegian" (in English Norse refers to all Scandinavians, whether living in Scandinavia or elsewhere, speaking the Old Norse language, i.e. also Danes and Swedes), since it lists all kinds of places and things connected to the Norse as having been Norwegian, with the Kingdom of Dublin as a prime example. It was a Norse kingdom founded by Norse people, but it wasn't a Norwegian kingdom, and no-one knows where the original founder came from, all that is known about him is that he was Norse. Which means that the Kingdom of Dublin can't be listed as having been founded by a Norwegian aristocrat, and the same goes for all of the other places. In fact that entire section, which is totally unsourced, doesn't belong here at all since there was no such thing as a hereditary aristocracy back then, only titles directly connected to a specific function/office. Whoever had that function/office had the title connected to it, but it didn't automatically rub off on all their descendants, and thus has nothing to do with aristocracy (). And the rest of the article is equally off target, meaning that this article is in desperate need of a major cleanup... - Tom | Thomas.W  talk 17:20, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Norse" does not mean "Norwegian" 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:21, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion