Talk:Brísingamen

message: My articles with sources have been censured. You have motivation I suppose, (I know that my Englih isn’t so good! I’m only a Viking) but there’s still a big problem to be impartial in Wiki ! When articles speak about Norse mythology we have only the Christians’ opinion! What's about Asatruar opinion? For us it isn’t mythology!  Today Christians are quiet and honest and I respect them, but history claim and prove that Christians were like ayatollahs during thousand years!  How can one thinks that they give us the truth on our Viking’s believes and pagan one?: All serious Historians agree with this(Boyer, Renaud, Mabire, Musset, Barthelemy…) Here my article:
We have to remember that it's the Christian clerks whom wrote and translated sagas, written a few centuries after the Viking era! (Inspired by Vitae Latina and Bible) This legend adapted for the Scandinavian Pantheon is in fact the means of the servants of the Church, not the original version! Christians wanted making fall into the collective spirit from the pagan people, the image of honourable Freyja (in German or Frigg in Norse), one of the Goddesses most respected, the symbol of the Woman, the Mother of the hearth, the maternal love, the romantic love… by humiliating her in this myth where she looks like a “prostitute” and covetous woman! The most strange is that the great Odin her husband misled and dishonoured don’t avenged himself! It is the same intention for the most powerful God, Thor , the symbol of virility, ridiculous by a absurd disguise, and give a bad image which he represents: a honourable fighter rather than to using comedy. Also for Freyr who is supposed having incest relation with his sister! I think that you have to consider that those calumnies are insults for Asatruar believers. I propose that in each article we expose the opinion of non Christians.Thorgis 15:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your explanations. I understand what you mean, and I’m sorry for my English. I’ll take care to stay completely neutral in regards to subjects. I’m not accustoming yet with encyclopedic definition! If you think that the following information is better, I request your help to translate in good English with changing few words if I still write not neutral sentences.
Here my new article: Historians know (1) that a large majority of Norse Mythology have been wrote or translate by Christians few centuries after Viking period, they wanted to give a bad look for Norse Gods. Another point of view for Norse believers explains that Freyja is one of the Goddesses most respected. She was the symbol of the Woman, the Mother of the hearth, the maternal love, the romantic love… she can’t be a “prostitute” and covetous woman. Odin her husband can’t be dishonored without avenged himself. Same for the most powerful God, Thor , the symbol of virility, ridiculous by an absurd disguise , or for Freyr who is supposed having incest relation with his sister. sources: (1) "L'Islande Médiévale" Régis Boyer, Guide belle lettres des civilisations  "Le Christ des barbares" Régis Boyer, les Editions du cerf 1987 
Thorgis 14:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Information removal

message: Cleanup Co-ordination	Cleanup Co-ordination
                     	This article has recently been tagged as requiring cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
The article may have been flagged as needing cleanup because it has been suggested that:
*the article needs formatting, proofreading, or rephrasing in comprehensible English. 
*the article has multiple overlapping problems. 
*the article is very short and might need expanding, removal or merging with a broader article
For a full list of possible problems see Wikipedia:Manual of Style.
You can use this section to discuss possible resolution of the problem and achieve consensus for action. When there is a consensus that the article is cleaned up please remove the cleanup tag from the article
===Discussion===    	
===Discussion===
As the article now stands it is fairly informative, NPOV, and coherent, and there are far worse articles out there in need of cleanup. I suggest that we remove the cleanup tag shortly unless there are cogent reasons for retaining them. If so, it would be helpful to have them outlined. Sjc 06:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much for your help! Thorgis 13:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Cleanup Co-Ordination Point 

message: |}</div>
As the article now stands it is fairly informative, NPOV, and coherent, and there are far worse articles out there in need of cleanup. I suggest that we remove the cleanup tag shortly unless there are cogent reasons for retaining them. If so, it would be helpful to have them outlined. Sjc 06:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much for your help! Thorgis 13:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: While I'm all for attacking the actions of people who claimed to be acting in the name of Christianity or the Christian god, Wikipedia is meant to keep a neutral point of view, and to allow readers to draw their own conclusions based on demonstrable facts. I don't believe that we need to say that Christian sources were biased if we can show that they euhemerized or otherwise altered the deities of other cultures in their accounts. Lucky number 49 14:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Re: Christianity

message: <-- This article before: cite zero source.
Which original pagan writings stated that When she wore it no man or god could withstand her charms, which was obviously a matter of great concern to the other goddesses during springtime when she reputedly wore it. The necklace also gave support to any army which she favoured on the battlefield. ??
Which original pagan writings stated that It was reputedly forged by four dwarves, and, in order to obtain it, she was obliged to spend a night with each of them in turn. Alternatively, King Alberich gave it to her. ?? There is no original text (christian or not) which states that Freyja hooked with dwarves for Brisingamen. I dare you to give me the mythological writing which states that.
Brísingamen also appears in a second euhemerized version in Sörla þáttr? Also? Second version? Excuse me. Where's the 1st version? Where's the original version?? They wrote as if there was a real pagan story which stated that the pagan goddess is a hooker, and Sörla þáttr only borrowed that. Wrong informations.
Why did you hide the rest like when Odin say: "Christened men" and Olaf Tryggvason? So that people won't find out that it's a christian story?
 <-- But when I improve this article, they started to put so much care into "where's your claim", "where's your source". Haha
Harkurth is incredible. When I wrote something and cited Jacob Grimm, he deleted it, saying "Grimm is obsolete". When I deleted some uncited information which bashed Victor Rydberg, Harkurth restored it, saying "It cites no source, but it's gererally accurate so I won't remove it". Who is this guy who is bigger than Swedish and German scholars? 123.19.52.89 (talk) 17:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think both of these 19th century scholars are obsolete and cannot generally be used as sources without some qualification. Both were, of course, astute scholars and gifted writers. Haukur (talk) 17:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what YOU think (with the word "you" in CAPS and the word "think" bolded)123.19.52.89 (talk) 18:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of changes have taken place in how scholars view Viking Age Scandinavia, not only because of the zeitgeist but also because of archaeological finds and progress in comparative mythology (e.g. Dumézil). A mainstream modern scholar is a much better source than both Grimm and Rydberg.--Berig (talk) 18:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what YOU think. Tell me again when you two have your own wiki, or when there's a new rule on Wikipedia which says "Harkurth and his friend Berig is teh rule". 123.19.52.89 (talk) 18:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds like you think WP is some kind of power struggle, 123. It is not. It is an encyclopedia where we edit according to policy. Don't you think the information on WP should be up to date?--Berig (talk) 07:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny, I think Grimm is obsolete too. But it doesn't give you or Harkurth the right to write stuffs without citing sources, or attack scholars without giving any proof that they are wrong. Just don't try to drive the conversation to another way. What I pointed out is that you and your friend never actually wanted to improve this article or to give sources. 123.19.62.226 (talk) 08:13, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: And suddenly Harkurth and Berig care so much about citing source

message: I saw the section stating the Nauglamír was the mythological equivalent to the Brísingamen which isn’t proven at all. The only similarities between the Brísingamen and the Nauglamír is that they are both beautiful dwarf-forged necklaces. That’s it.
Furthermore the rest of the paragraph made multiple errors,  including one that stated Túrin Turambar was the one who brought the Nauglamír to Thingol, even though by that point in the timeline he was already dead, and the Nauglamír was really given by his father, Húrin Thalion. As far as I know, it is also not stated that Thingol wanted to remake it for his wife, Melian. In an earlier version, it is Thingol himself who wears the Nauglamír (named the Nauglafring) and this causes his downfall, but in the published Silmarillion the Nauglamír with the Silmaril set in it was worn later by his daughter, Lúthien Tinúviel.
I’m just a humble Tolkien nerd who noticed some errors and made an account to edit it! :)
Elenmír (talk) 12:02, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Silmarillion section