Talk:Coronations in Norway

message: Does anyone know where the coronations in Oslo took place? -- Nidator T / C 11:22, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Place of coronation in Oslo?

message: It seems like there is some evidence for this. Does anyone know more about it? -- Nidator T / C 11:22, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Eric of Pomerania crowned in Norway in 1392?

message: This post is in response to the changes made by Jm3106jr. Yes, with regards to Christianity Norway is overwhelmingly Lutheran, but not in 1449 when coronations began in Trondheim (Nidaros). The Reformation came to Norway almost 90 years later. Further, there has never been a Lutheran archbishop in Norway, and, while the chief prelate has recently been the Bishop of Nidaros, the leadership of the Church of Norway is not tied to the diocese. The first paragraph of this article was correct, if perhaps somewhat incomplete. I will make the appropriate changes. -- Nidator T / C 17:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that before the Reformation all of western Europe was Catholic - but to use the term "Roman Catholic Norwegian Archiocese" is both anachronistic and sounds like a personal agenda is being pushed. The term "Roman Catholic" was not in common use before the Reformation - the Christian Church was simply "the Church" or perhaps the "Catholic Church." No one would write "Roman Catholic Italian Archdiocese" for the Archdiocese of Milan, for example. The point of the article is to indicate where coronations took place - in this case Trondheim at the Nidaros Cathedral. Nidaros/Trondheim is traditionally the chief eccelsiastical seat in Norway -- just as Uppsala is in Sweden, Canterbury in England, Krakow in Poland, Armagh in Ireland, etc. While the state Lutheran Church, the Church of Norway, may not have archbishops or archdioceses, it does not seem to make any sense to mention that Trondheim was a "Roman Catholic" Archdiocese in 1449. What else could it have been? If people want to learn about the the history of the Nidaros/Trondheim archdiocese, this is already linked - with additional links for the current Lutheran diocese of Trondheim. Jm3106jr (talk) 12:56, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no objections to the change, but I'm struggling to figure out what my "personal agenda" is supposed to have been. Could you clarify? --Nidator T / C 13:38, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a rather delayed reply. I found in other Wikipedia articles that edits have been made on what seem to be sectarian lines that might reflect the religious preferences of the author. In other words, if an author had a bias, it could come out in various ways. You were probably trying to be accurate rather than sectarian and I accept that you indeed had no such agenda. You quite rightly note that the leadership of the Church of Norway is not tied to any diocese. Jm3106jr (talk) 00:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catholic vs Lutheran and Bishop vs Archbishop 

message: I agree that the Coat of Arms from 1905 is not the best choice to use in the places where it appears (in the 'list of coronations' table); however, the recent changes made that table look much worse than it did, when the COA was included.  I reverted back to the old table; I'm all in favor of replacing the 1905 COA with something more appropriate--such as an image of each monarch if we can find one--but to simply delete the COA and leave the table in the state it was left in was not the right way to go, in my opinion.  I did replace two of the COA's with appropriate images for each monarch concerned, but until we find a better image to replace the other two with, the 1905 COA should stay. - Ecjmartin (talk) 17:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The user broke the table by removing the image of the coat, so I agree with your decision to revert. That said, I do think that we should replace it with something as soon as possible or, if nothing suitable can be found, remove it without damaging the table. It does not add anything to the entry about, say, Margaret of Scotland's coronation - it simply has nothing to do with her. Margaret's entry seems to be the only one left. Do you have any suggestions? Surtsicna (talk) 19:44, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

text: On second thought, why do we need those images anyway? They do not depict the coronations themselves; the table, of course, is supposed to list coronations rather than crowned people. Personally, I really like the table used in the list of British coronations. It presents all the essential information about the coronation itself without going into unnecessary detail. Surtsicna (talk) 20:26, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: To be honest, I like the images being there: if nothing else, they add some 'life' to the table by giving us an image of the person who was crowned.  I do agree with you that the 1905 COA image should be replaced ASAP with something better (maybe I can look into that, this weekend); also, if I can crop the Haakon VII coronation image to an upright orientation (should be easy to do), I'm going to post it to commons and then add it to the table--that way, we'll have at least one actual coronation image, itself.  But I would prefer to see the other images stay, myself. - Ecjmartin (talk) 22:00, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

text: I replaced the old Haakon VII image with a new, cropped one I found on Commons (saved me some trouble!).  I also added an image from H VII's coronation, but that one went to the article body, not the table.  I'll see what I can find to replace the COA image, in the next day or so... - Ecjmartin (talk) 22:32, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've deleted the COA image, and just left it blank.  I think that unless we can find an image of Margaret of Scotland (which I've been unable to do, after visiting several sites), this would be the best solution. - Ecjmartin (talk) 15:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  1905 Coat of Arms in 'list of coronations' section