User talk:Roede

Hello, Roede, Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like working here and want to continue. Check out the Simplified Ruleset. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at the Guide to layout, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — if you have any questions, or just want to say hello, feel free to contact me on my Talk Page.

---

Additional tips:

Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:

• Always use wikiquette
• Write from a neutral point of view
• If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
• Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
• You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
• Always use edit summaries when editing pages.
• You might want to add yourself to the New User Log
• If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language
• Full details on Wikipedia style can be found in the Manual of Style.

Happy editing!

--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 07:59, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Stiftsgården

Hi! Thanks for your edits to Stiftsgården. I put some comments on the Talk:Stiftsgården page about the recent edits, and wanted to make sure that you saw them. :) --Syrthiss 14:16, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Norwegian?

Hi, might you by any chance be a Norwegian? If so, please feel free to add yourself to our category! :-) --Wernher 13:27, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Norwegian architecture

Thanks for the edits of this article; I hope you'll continue to work on this subject - I was actually thinking of nominating the article to be a featured article when it's more complete and improved. Your efforts will help make that happen. --Leifern 22:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Architecture of Norway - featured candidate

Roede - I've taken the liberty of nominating Architecture of Norway for featured status. Since your edits so far have been very helpful, I hope this nomination will encourage you to continue your good work. mvh --Leifern 10:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I am honoured, Leifern! My contributions will continue to trickle in at an unsteady pace. Summertime, and the living is easy, so perhaps you will see something soon. There are lots of things to clarify and lots of important information to add before we can give passing grades to the article. Roede 20:54, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Roede - I see that the article has been significantly improved and expanded, and I'd like to resubmit it as a featured article. I am hoping to spend some time adding to the article on vernacular architecture over the next few days, as I'm traveling to Norway. I may also add some photographs, as among other things I should be going by the famous funkis house in Hamar. --Leifern 18:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Monogramlov?

Valentinian spurte om en template til de norske våpenskjoldene ala: {{PD-Coa-Germany}}

Tror du at du kan fikse det? Jeg vet om [1], men jeg finner ingen ting.

Sweden-Norway

Please see: Talk:Flag of Sweden, Camptown 08:03, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Folkung Lion

Thank you for challenging my erroneous notion of the Folkung Lion as a symbol of medieval Finland. I have found more sources on the use of the symbol, providing evidence that derivative symbols used in Finland were drawn from, and significantly predated by, the use of the symbol of the House of Bjälbo in medieval Sweden. The Folkung Lion is, therefor, unequivocally Swedish. Wilhelm meis (talk) 20:16, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the Folkung lion is Finnish only in so far as Finland was a part of Sweden until 1809. Thank you for reverting to my earlier version concerning the dexter base of Eric's union arms. But why have you deleted my comment regarding the three crowns dexter chief? They were of course the newer Swedish arms, probably introduced already during the reign of king Magnus VII Eriksson of Sweden and Norway, king also of Scania 1332-1360. However, they were a symbol of the Kalmar Union as well, and used as such in the sigillum ad causas of Margaret, possibly also by Eric of Pomerania. See the seal depicted in the article on the Kalmar Union. Since Sweden is already represented in Eric's union arms by the Folkung lion, the three crowns might in this context rather be interpreted as an allusion to the Union.

One other thing: You have also reverted to an earlier version proclaiming Margaret as queen of Denmark. She was in fact never queen of Denmark, although her title is sometimes given as "queen regnant" in English translations. The Danish article on Margaret states unequivocally: "Margrete har aldrig været dronning af Danmark, da en kvinde kun kunne være "fuldmægtig frue og husbonde og Danmarks riges formynder". Ihvertfald indtil sønnen, hendes mindreårige søn Oluf, kunne blive konge. Så mens Oluf var mindreårig, var hun hans formynder og regerede på hans vegne. Da Oluf døde i 1387, valgte Rigsrådet Margrete til regent...". But she was definitely queen of Norway from her marriage in 1363 to king Håkon VI Magnusson until his death in 1380. And she was even queen of Sweden for two years, until Håkon was deposed from the Swedish throne i 1362. But never queen of Denmark. I trust that you will agree to the reversion that I am about to do. Roede (talk) 12:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Erik av Pommern, Tre Kronor, Margrete

Regarding the use of the three crowns, I maintain that there is compelling evidence to suggest that the three crowns originated as a Swedish symbol, possibly representing the triple reign of Albrecht, predating the Kalmar Union, but I do concede that there is some controversy regarding whether its use in Erik's seal is representative of Sweden or of the Kalmar Union. Regarding Margrete, I have found encyclopedic sources online and in print that agree that Margrete was elected sovereign ruler of Sweden by the Riksdag in 1388, but ruled Denmark (from 1375) and Norway (from 1388) only as Regent. Therefor, I contend that if it is erroneous to call her Margaret of Denmark, it is also erroneous to call her Margaret of Norway. It may be most correct to call her Margaret of Sweden, although she is widely called (in English) "Margaret, Queen of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden". If we are to stay in keeping with common usage, perhaps we should amend the page to say "Margaret, Queen of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden". Wilhelm meis (talk) 20:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Eric of Pomerania

Since you have been a contributor here, you might want to have a look at Talk:Eric VII of Denmark#undiscussed move back to Eric of Pomerania. There will also be talk of some other page moves (other early Danish and Swedish kings). Cheers! Wilhelm_meis (talk) 15:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Sweden in Union with Norway

Hello, just a note that I wrote a comment on Talk:Sweden in Union with Norway and another at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sweden regarding this suitability of this article (title) as the focus for Sweden's 19th century history. Tomas e (talk) 18:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Paper clip, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elasticity (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:34, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Union between Sweden and Norway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oscar II (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Union Jack of Norway and Sweden

Please STOP decapitalizing "Union Jack" and revert back to it properly. The official name of the flag was Unionsgjös. Because that is a designated name rather than an informal name, that makes it a proper noun, and also makes it's English translation a proper noun. It's Union Jack, not Union jack. Fry1989 ^eh? 18:45, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

What is your source for the alleged official name unionsgjös? Roede (talk) 08:19, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

This. Unionsgjös is a single word, and because it's an official name that means it is a proper noun. That also means any English translation, even if it's broken into two words instead of one, is also a proper noun. The proper translation of Unionsgjös in English is "Union Jack", with the capitalization on both words because it's a proper name. The flag was only called the örlogsgös when used as the naval jack by the Swedish and Norwegian navies. Fry1989 ^eh? 18:45, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, that image is one my own contributions to the world of vexillology. And if you look closely at the caption, you will see that the author, lieutenant colonel Carl Johan Anker (1835-1903) wrote the name unionsgjøs not capitalized, because he - and everybody else in Norway and Sweden - considered it a common noun, not an official name, and certainly not a proper noun. I recommend the excellent article on naval jacks in the Swedish Wikipedia, Gös (flagga). The article has no capitalization of the words örlogsgös, örlogsflagga, unionsmärke or unionsgös. It does state that the unionsgös is evidently inspired by the British "unionsgös" — the British Union Jack. Which is a proper noun and name, like the Dannebrog and the French Tricolore and the Stars and Stripes. But the naval jack of the US Navy is just the union jack, according to the US Navy Regulations: "The U.S. union jack consists of the blue canton of the ensign. Jacks are displayed at the jackstaff, a pole mounted on the bow of the ship, on ships in commission or in service. They are never flown ashore. The size of the jack is always the same as the size of the canton of the ensign at the flagstaff. The jack is displayed only during the hours between 8:00 a.m. and sunset, when the ship is not underway and the ensign is flying on the flagstaff. If the ensign is half-masted, so is the jack. (Navy Regulations 1259.5 and 1264; NTP 13(B) 0804)". See: http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeohzt4/Seaflags/ensign/Ensign.html. Roede (talk) 20:19, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

The British "Union Jack" is not a proper noun because that's not it's real name, it's just the name that has been commonly associated with the flag. It's real name has always been the "Union Flag". The US' "Union Jack" is a proper noun because that is the official name of the canton of the American flag when used by itself as the jack of the United States Navy. The American situation has more in common with the Sweden-Norway Union Jack than the British one in that sense. Yes, naval jacks are never flown on land (except a few unique circumstances), but the Sweden-Norway one wasn't just a naval jack (örlogsgös), it was also placed in the canton of the civil flag and ensigns of Sweden and Norway (handelsflagg), the royal standards of the two kingdoms, and flown by itself as a common consular flag at embassies. Because of those uses, it never would have been called the "örlogsgös" except for when it was being used as the naval jack. Different uses distinguished the different names, either örlogsgös or unionsgös, depending on what situation it was used in, even if it's still nominally the same flag either way. Because of the unique history of the word "örlogs" being associated with military navies in Scandinavia, it could not have been called örlogsgös except when used by either the Swedish or Norwegian navies, the other uses would have to have a different name, and the image shows that it did, that name was unionsgös. Now the rules about nouns and capitalization may be different between Swedish and English, but this is the English Wikipedia, and under the rules of the English Language, unionsgös would properly be translated as "Union Jack". Fry1989 ^eh? 20:43, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

The Union Jack of Great Britain is not an official name, no more than the Stars and Stripes and the Tricolore. But they are all popular nicknames, evoking patriotic sentiments. That makes them proper names, commonly capitalized in writing, as are personal nicknames (Satchmo, Fats and Billy the Kid). In Scandinavia, nicknames are also capitalized. But among existing flags, only Dannebrog merits capitalization, because it is a proper name. The only other Scandinavian flag (of the modern period) with a commonly used nickname, was "Sildesalaten" — originally a pejorative term, but often also used as an affectionate name. Hence capitalized. But the official name for that symbol was unionsmerket/unionsmärket. Not capitalized in Swedish, but usually capitalized in Norwegian until 1907. (But not later, because of an orthographic reform). In both languages no national flag, official or not, will have its appellation capitalized. And that seems to be the case in most countries (Le drapeau de la France, le pavillon de la Marine, De vlag van Nederland, De geus van een marineschip van de Koninklijke Marine) The Dutch naval jack, by the way, has a proper name: "Prinsengeus". Even in English-speaking countries flags are denoted with common nouns, unless they have individual proper names: (national flag of France, flag of Denmark, flag of the Netherlands, the naval jack of the Netherlands — and the union jack of the US Navy or the jack of the United States). All of these examples from the English Wikipedia seem to confirm that on this website, and under the rules of the English Language, unionsgös/unionsgjøs would properly be translated as "union jack".

Our friendly discussion seems to have reached its conclusion, all arguments having been introduced for consideration. I propose that we let the article remain in its present stat, until new relevant information is brought forth. Roede (talk) 07:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually I haven't had time to respond. Read what I said again: I never said "Union Jack" was an official name for the UK flag, i said the very opposite. The official name is "Union Flag", "Union Jack" is just a common nickname. I also said that Unionsgjos IS the official name for the Sweden-Norway flag, and because of that, it is a proper name, and therefore capitalized under the rules of the English language. Fry1989 ^eh? 01:54, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

STOP TROLLING! It is a proper noun and must be capitalized! Fry1989 ^eh? 19:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naval jack.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
• You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

"Unconfirmed"

YOu need to stop adding "unconfirmed" to things you aren't certain about. It is very problematic. You can add "citation needed" beside the image, that is the proper thing to do. Fry1989 ^eh? 18:45, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Coat of arms of Norway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Krone (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Union Jack of Sweden and Norway, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Pol430 talk to me 09:33, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sod roof may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ] in immediate need of repair. Trees will soon destroy a sod roof. <small>Photo: Roede</small>.}]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:38, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Arms of Eric of Pomerania

I noticed you recently changed the arms of Eric of Pomerania at division of the field, which got me thinking about reliable sources. I have been unable to find a reliable source today in support of either version of these arms. Kungahuset says Eric used the three crowns as his union symbol and credits Karl Knutsson Bonde with the first quartered shield combining the three crowns and the lion shield. The Swedish Heraldry Society's database seems to be down today, but (in this article) they say that Eric used the three crowns, though maybe on a red shield rather than blue. Do you have a reliable source attesting that Eric ever used these quartered arms (File:Erik av Pommern 2000px.png) at all or might these be later arms anachronistically attributed to Eric? Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 15:44, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I see we have a photo of a (wax?) document seal used by Eric, with a reliable source for the photo, but it gives no indication of colour. Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 15:52, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

The file Erik av Pommern 2000px.png was uploaded by me on 17 March 2012 because most articles about this king and the Kalmar union were illustrated by the file Armoiries Eric de Poméranie, roi de Danemark.svg. This last image was derived from an incorrect version of Eric's coat of arms, created by Arnaud Bunel of Heraldique Européienne. This file has two major faults: The lion of Norway holds an elongated axe, almost a halberd, and the cross is modeled on the Dannebrog cross that was introduced by later kings of the union. The ancient lion of Norway carried the battle axe of St. Olav, with a short, straight handle. It became gradually more and more curved, partly because of the outline of the escutcheon, but certainly also because the lion appeared on many coins. Its short axe was restored in 1844.

The great seal of king Eric was used for the most important documents; for minor matters he used a seal with three crowns. This was done also by his adoptive mother Margrethe as regent of the Kalmar union. On her original sarcophagus in Roskilde Cathedral the same union arms were depicted, probably with colours. The appearance of the cross dividing the field have been a bone of contention among experts on Scandinavian heraldry. The prevailing theory is that it was red (gules), from the banner of the Kalmar union introduced by king Eric. (See more about this flag on FOTW). The case against the Dannebrog cross is based on the fact that there is no fimbriation of the cross dividing Eric's great seal. In addition, he would have been very unwise to use a specific Danish symbol for a Nordic union. That would have been an insult to his subjects in Norway and Sweden.

The best authority on the Kalmar union arms is the eminent Danish authority on heraldry, Nils G. Bartholdy. When I uploaded my file on Commons, I added an explanation and a reference to his article: "The cross dividing the escutcheon of the Kalmar union was not that of the Dannebrog, but most likely the red cross of the Kalmar union flag, also introduced by Eric of Pomerania. Ref: Nils G. Bartholdy: "De tre kroner og korset - Unionssymbolik, ambition og rivalitet". In: "Heraldisk Tidsskrift", Vol. 8, No. 76, October 1997, pp. 233-260." In case you do not read Danish, the first part of th title in English would be The three crowns and the cross. I strongly recommend this article. Greetings from Lars Roede (talk) 20:08, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. My concern is to improve the verifiability of Wikipedia's heraldic content. Your response is very helpful. Thanks! Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 20:29, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Log house, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Baltic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Coat of arms of Norway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Frederick V, Frederick I, Frederick IV, Frederick VI, Frederick III and Frederick II

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naval jack concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naval jack, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:04, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Coat of arms of Norway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bernadotte (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Meeting of Notables, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christiania (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naval jack concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naval jack, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Request that you return and provide sourcing for your article information

On 28 May 2007‎ added substantial information to the article on the Kalmar Union. I would like to request that you return to the article to indicate the sources from which you drew the material that you added. Otherwise the article will remain in a rather sorry shape, because much of your early information (and further added since) remains without proper sourcing. Thank you. 71.239.87.100 (talk) 14:28, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naval jack

Hello Roede. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Naval jack".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naval jack}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 13:33, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Old Norwegian flag

Whether the lion faces left or right should be discussed on the talk page of File:War Ensign of Norway (1814).svg and then that file can be changed if it is wrong. You should not replace it with an inferior PNG file that you claim was your own work when it is not and you only took it from another user and flipped the lion around. Please discuss on the file talk page and do this the right way. Fry1989 ^eh? 14:52, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

December 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Union between Sweden and Norway may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Eidsvoll]]. Following the adoption of the new [[Constitution of Norway]] on 17 May 1814, prince {[[Christian Frederick]] was elected king. The [[Swedish-Norwegian War (1814)]] compelled the [[

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:22, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Norway in 1814, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dannebrog. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Trembita, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Baltic. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naval jack has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naval jack. Thanks! JMHamo (talk) 17:43, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of Norway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christiania. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Log house, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lom. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Roede. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Naval jack

Hello, Roede. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Naval jack".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 (talk) 05:32, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, 1989. Happy New Year!

True, it has been a long time since I last edited my draft article nominated for deletion, "Naval jack". For a long time I tried in vain to contribute to English Wikipedia an article on this important topic of vexillology, which had and still have articles in numerous other languages. My efforts were repeatedly rejected, for reasons not very clearly specified. I gave up this well-meant project.

Then, lo and behold, in March of last year I came across another article on the same subject, Jack (flag). That article had also been nominated for deletion by the censorship authorities, but was miraculously spared on 27 January 2016, in other words not ″material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia". I found that it had much of the same content as my aborted attempt, and that it could do with some supplementary information. I seized this opportunity and added much of the material from my own deleted article Naval Jack to this newcomer. In which it still constitutes a considerable part.

Hence, I abandoned my defense of Naval Jack and considered the article Jack(flag) a satisfactory substitute, and my own efforts not wasted, after all. So, go ahead, delete.

By the way, I was a bit surprised to see that this issue was still not settled and deletion long since carried out. It may be a false recollection, but I remember from March of 2015 that I explained much of the above when I retrieved material from the undesirable article and pasted it into the one still available article. Now I can't find where I wrote my comments. Again, may 2017 be a good one for our great encyclopeda. Greetings from Lars Roede (talk) 10:45, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Roede. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Coat of arms of Norway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oscar I (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Roede. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Coat of arms

This is the right Gizurr: Gissur Þorvaldsson. Haukur (talk) 13:59, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Standard language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christiania (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Open-air museum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gol (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:21, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:20, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)