Talk:Fortid
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Untitled[edit]
Hello. Thanks for the cleaning. I see that the image has stopped working. Does any of you who are more routined wikipedia users know how to fix it? --Marthe Glad (talk) 15:54, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
- This is a copyrighted image that was uploaded to Commons, which does nto allow fair use. You should upload it to the English WP only, which does allow fair use. For an example, see File:G2Bcover.jpg. --Guillaume233 (talk) 14:29, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Notability[edit]
Hello. I saw that the article is flagged as not notable enough. What is the problem, and how can I amend it? Would more recent reviews and mentions of more recent debates help it's case? The journal has a voice in the norwegian history community, and it would be sad to see the article go.
- For some suggestions, see the Journal article writing guide (linked in the banner above), WP:NJournals, and WP:GNG. --Guillaume233 (talk) 14:26, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- I see. This means that I should insert references to articles that use articles from Fortid as references? (this feels a bit strange...) Or will references to reviews be sufficient? --Marthe Glad (talk) 12:55, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- No, that would indeed be overdoing it. Any journal will have dozens of such references. Ideally, there are third-party sources discussing the journal (this happens only rarely for academic journals, though). Another good thing is inclusion in selective major databases. Given the references that you have added, I have removed the notability tag. It's minimal and probably wouldn't fly if this were a different subject, but we try to be a bit more indulgent with academic journals (but many other editors will disagree with this point of view, I should note). --Guillaume2303 (talk) 13:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you, that is great.--Marthe Glad (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- No, that would indeed be overdoing it. Any journal will have dozens of such references. Ideally, there are third-party sources discussing the journal (this happens only rarely for academic journals, though). Another good thing is inclusion in selective major databases. Given the references that you have added, I have removed the notability tag. It's minimal and probably wouldn't fly if this were a different subject, but we try to be a bit more indulgent with academic journals (but many other editors will disagree with this point of view, I should note). --Guillaume2303 (talk) 13:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- I see. This means that I should insert references to articles that use articles from Fortid as references? (this feels a bit strange...) Or will references to reviews be sufficient? --Marthe Glad (talk) 12:55, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
File:Fortid tidskrift 110.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]
|
An image used in this article, File:Fortid tidskrift 110.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC) |
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Fortid. 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/20120426022128/http://www.fortid.no/Fortid%20i%20media/Framtidas%20historikere.pdf to http://www.fortid.no/Fortid%20i%20media/Framtidas%20historikere.pdf
- Added archive https://archive.is/20120526223429/http://www2.uit.no/ikbViewer/page/studiesokere/studietilbud/emne?p_document_id=182076&p_d_i=-28898&p_d_c=&p_d_v=&ar=&semester=&sprakkode=&fagfelt=&faggruppe=&p_d_i=-47400&p_d_c=&p_d_v= to http://www2.uit.no/ikbViewer/page/studiesokere/studietilbud/emne?p_document_id=182076&p_d_i=-28898&p_d_c=&p_d_v=&ar=&semester=&sprakkode=&fagfelt=&faggruppe=&p_d_i=-47400&p_d_c=&p_d_v=
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719123627/http://www.hibo.no/index.php?ID=9509&lang=nor&function=dumpBeskrivelse&module=studieinfo&type=studieme&key=1583 to http://www.hibo.no/index.php?ID=9509&lang=nor&function=dumpBeskrivelse&module=studieinfo&type=studieme&key=1583
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:13, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:52, 19 January 2019 (UTC)