Talk:Norway/Archive 4

message: :"The Kingdom of Norway (Nynorsk: Kongeriket Noreg; Bokmål: Kongeriket Norge) is a Nordic country west of Sweden on the Scandinavian Peninsula."
It's a bit long. Aren't there better ways of describing the "Norge/Noreg" situation? Besides, the links to Nynorsk and Bokmål are both redirects to Norwegian language, and it is a bit misleading to give impression of two separate articles, when there's only one. 14:32, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How about deleting the parentheses, like it was before: "The Kingdom of Norway is a Nordic country west of Sweden on the Scandinavian Peninsula."   The Norwegian versions of the country name are listed in the infobox anyway and, as long as Bokmål/Nynorsk are stated as official languages, it may not be necessary to explain the Norge/Noreg situation any further. --Eddi 01:30, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I wanted, but it was reverted. 10:20, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The opinions could be polled here and, if conclusive, support one or the other version. --Eddi 20:26, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: My take is rephrasing the "west of Sweden" statement. While factually true, the same could be said if we wrote "west of China" or "east of Greenland". Using "bordering Russia, Finland and Sweden, with territorial waters bordering Danish and Brtish" would be less patronizing of Norway. As it is, enough people think Norway is the capital of Sweden, and using a "Sweden is a point of reference that more people know of" as an argument would be odd - considering how Russia is also immideately east of Norway, and, I should think, rather well known. I know it doesen't exactly shorten the opening sentece, but this is a hot point for me. --TVPR 09:16, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening sentence / Country name 

message: === Census ===
Does Norway have census? The infobox indicates a census of 2001, but Norwegian authorities keeps a continuous count (from births and deaths), and does not hold census in the manner of other some other countries, as far as I know. 06:58, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The last Norwegian census was held in 2001. Although it focused on standard of living, employment, education, standard of residences, size of households, temporary location of residents etc., it was indeed a census counting the population. It was proposed to be the last Norwegian census ever, and so far it has been... See http://www.ssb.no/fob/ --Eddi (Talk) 23:55, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population 

message: Does Norway have census? The infobox indicates a census of 2001, but Norwegian authorities keeps a continuous count (from births and deaths), and does not hold census in the manner of other some other countries, as far as I know. 06:58, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The last Norwegian census was held in 2001. Although it focused on standard of living, employment, education, standard of residences, size of households, temporary location of residents etc., it was indeed a census counting the population. It was proposed to be the last Norwegian census ever, and so far it has been... See http://www.ssb.no/fob/ --Eddi (Talk) 23:55, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Census 

message: It has been argued to use the population from the list of countries by population. Why should it be used, if it isn't the most recent estimate? The first list on that page is taken from the 2003 edition of the CIA World Factbook, and even if it was taken from the 2004 edition it would be far from updated. The second list is dated January 2005, but the source is not stated. By the way, the recently reverted population estimate did not use the population from the list at all. In my opinion the best source for the article on Norway would be the official Statistics Norway. For the complete list, the CIA World Factbook or something else could be used. --Eddi (Talk) 13:48, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source of population estimates 

message: As per a recent edit summary, how is "early in the century" defined? Ten first years? Twenty? --Kaleissin 11:57:48, 2005-09-03 (UTC)
:Irrelevant. --84.234.215.241 19:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: How does one define ''early''?

message: Unless we include Svalbard, which is a special case which does not qualify as "northern regions" (what regions?).
Take a close look at a map. From Oslo, Rome is farther away than any point on mainland Norway -by a clear margin.
Therefore, I suggest this: Oslo in fact being closer to Paris than to Vardø. 
Because that is actually a correct statement. Orcaborealis 22:55, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if your statement is actually correct, I see no problem with it. Is Vardø Norwegian for Svalbard (I'm American, the only link I have to Norway being that my girlfriend is Norwegian)?Tommstein 00:51, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Nevermind that stupid question, I looked at the article and now see what Vardø is. I don't think being closer to Paris is all that impressive though, so maybe the sentence should just be completely removed.Tommstein 00:54, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

text: lat.=latitude; long.=longitude
Exactly. So the statement "Oslo being closer to Rome" is false, by a good margin. Even if we use Lindesnes, the statement is false. This is the free encyclopedia - false statements are of course unacceptable. If anyting, one of it's purposes is to falsify myths.  
Here is a suggestion that might underline the elongated shape: Vardø is the easternmost town in Western Europe and is in fact east of Istanbul. This is correct, if we use the standard definitions of western Europe. 
Or, we could just mention the distance from north to south (1770 km, isn't it?).
Or, we could just drop it and delete the sentence. 
And Tommstein, as I see it, where we happen to live is of no importance.  Orcaborealis 15:54, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I was just saying, my expertise on this probably pales badly compared to that of an actual Norwegian. I say, whip out the most impressive fact(s) that can be found, and stick it/them in. If none are too impressive, then we might as well not bother. Although that 'east of Istanbul' fact is impressive to me (what comes after Turkey, Iraq?). Saying that the southernmost point as almost as close to Rome than Vardø is also impressive, even if that southermost point isn't anything special and Vardø isn't a straight shot north; that highlights how long the country is.Tommstein 06:12, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oslo not closer to Rome