This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see this page.
This article is part of WikiProject Norway, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Norway. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Was I too libelous the last time on this discussion page? (See the change log.) Perhaps it could have been phrased better, but I thought I had made the appropriate links to credible sources. Dahl's ownership interests(with interest conflict?) and his views on David Irving should be mentioned. There is such a thing as misrepresentation through silence. Please do not just wipe the post out if you object to some of it's content, for it takes time to dig up the links. --Krekling (talk) 23:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
This article is totally one sided, and does not at all reflect the general view on Dahl in Norwegian scientific circles. The information cited is correct, but represenst only one side, one epsiode and ommits quite a lot. The authorities cited are not representative and are not in any way neutral or good sources. please looka at the correspondiong Norwegian article on Dahl to get a more balanced view. The painting of Dahl as a virtual neo-nazi and weak historian does is untrue, and he is widely regarded as one of the leading Norwegian ofg his generation. He is controversioal and has made several not so wise statements, but a page such as this can not be so NPOV, more needs to be added. Olatei (talk) 12:58, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
I wish you good luck in improving and expanding the article. I have fixed/added links to encyclopedia articles on Dahl. It might be beneficial to take notes of the content of those web pages rather quickly, as the publisher has announced that the online version of encyclopedia will be discontinued in its current form from July 2010. Dahl seems to be a controversial historian. Some of the criticism of his judgements as a historian is substantial and serious, and should therefore be discussed in the article. Other aspects, such as his ownership shares of a nazi publishing house, also give certain signals. I added a few more references, mostly from newspapers. Oceanh (talk) 01:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
It looks like the online version of SNL has survived. Geschichte (talk) 08:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Olatei in that historians' and historiographers' views on Dahl are not discussed. For instance, the reception of the Quisling biograpy is very lacking. And about Historisk forlag, what is a "Nazi publishing house"? But I agree with Oceanh that this is up to any user to improve. Geschichte (talk) 08:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)